Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 14:01:32 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern kern_event.c src/sys/sys eventvar.h Message-ID: <20040714210132.GI95729@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <200407142037.i6EKba0E026064@gw.catspoiler.org> References: <20040714191118.GF95729@elvis.mu.org> <200407142037.i6EKba0E026064@gw.catspoiler.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Don Lewis <truckman@FreeBSD.org> [040714 13:38] wrote: > On 14 Jul, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > * Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> [040714 12:01] wrote: > > >> Seems to me that the best thing to do is to defer the psigio() to a > >> taskqueue that will run in a simpler locking environment. > > > > I was thinking that, but I'm worried about "stale delivery", > > perhaps we need to record the generation count (process start time) > > in the sigio as well as the request sent, so that we don't send > > a signal to the wrong process. > > This is already handled in the sigio infrastructure. Both struct proc > and struct pgrp have a list of their potential sigio sources. When the > process or process group goes away, the exit code disables sigio > delivery. Yes, but if the delivery of the signal becomes async, then we lose this. -- - Alfred Perlstein - Research Engineering Development Inc. - email: bright@mu.org cell: 408-480-4684
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040714210132.GI95729>