Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2003 16:09:57 -0500 (EST) From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10304021607490.29374-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> In-Reply-To: <20030402154406.N64602-100000@mail.chesapeake.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Jeff Roberson wrote: > On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Juli Mallett wrote: > > > * De: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> [ Data: 2003-04-02 ] > > [ Subjecte: Re: libthr and 1:1 threading. ] > > > On Wed, 2 Apr 2003, Terry Lambert wrote: > > > > Also, any ETA on the per process signal mask handing bug in > > > > libthr? Might not be safe to convert everything up front, in > > > > a rush of eager enthusiasm... > > > > > > Which bug is that? I'm not aware of it. > > > > I think Terry is referring to the Uncertainty & Doubt as if it were > > a bug over the lack of a process sigmask (moved into the threads), > > as raised by the M:N group. > > POSIX specifically says that the signal mask is per thread. I'd be very Yes, but you've moved the mask into the kernel thread, whereas in libkse threads are in the UTS. Mulitple threads can be run in one kernel thread, and the UTS doesn't want to enter the kernel to set the signal mask. -- Dan Eischen
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10304021607490.29374-100000>