Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 16:29:48 -0700 From: Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/osf1 osf1_signal.c Message-ID: <20020930162948.A50424@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0209301404060.82116-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>; from julian@elischer.org on Mon, Sep 30, 2002 at 02:05:37PM -0700 References: <20020930135948.A41526@FreeBSD.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0209301404060.82116-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* De: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> [ Data: 2002-09-30 ] [ Subjecte: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/osf1 osf1_signal.c ] > > > On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Juli Mallett wrote: > > > > > I should mention that signal delivery is now decidedly almost LIFO, and > > will be fully LIFO once everything uses a ksiginfo, and not a signal > > number... Right now it's almost racey, which leaves it undefined, but > > it's mostly like... [keep in mind the proc lock must be held, so there > > is no race, and it is defined, but...] > > 1. Check the signal queue... > > 2. Pop a signal number off... The most recently recv'd... > > 3. Dequeue the first signal we find with that signo... > > 4. Send it... > > IF IT'S A tailq, why isn't it FIFO? > would it make a difference to have one queue per type? Because you want the most immediate thing, think about recieving SIGSTOP while you have other signals queued. -- Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> | FreeBSD: The Power To Serve Will break world for fulltime employment. | finger jmallett@FreeBSD.org http://people.FreeBSD.org/~jmallett/ | Support my FreeBSD hacking! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020930162948.A50424>