Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2010 06:59:34 -0700 From: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com> To: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl> Subject: Re: svn commit: r209595 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <4C2B4DC6.1050404@feral.com> In-Reply-To: <201006300934.47629.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201006292044.o5TKiJd7031766@svn.freebsd.org> <20100629210522.GY2179@hoeg.nl> <201006300934.47629.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Excuse my ignorance, but aren't signals supposed to be to processes, not specific threads? My memory/knowledge of Posix in this area is very rusty. > On Tuesday 29 June 2010 5:05:22 pm Ed Schouten wrote: > >> * John Baldwin<jhb@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >> >>> Log: >>> Send SIGPIPE to the thread that issued the offending system call >>> rather than to the entire process. >>> >> Should something similar be used inside the TTY layer, where >> reads/writes may cause signals to be generated? >> > Hmm, I'm not sure. I do think you want to stop the entire process for SIGTTOU > or SIGTTIN (often the entire process group it seems), so I'm not sure if it > matters if the signal is sent to only the current thread versus sending it to > any thread in the process. > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C2B4DC6.1050404>