Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 1 Oct 2002 00:46:29 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>
To:        Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/alpha/osf1 osf1_signal.c
Message-ID:  <200210010446.g914kTQJ048155@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20020930162948.A50424@FreeBSD.org>
References:  <20020930135948.A41526@FreeBSD.org> <Pine.BSF.4.21.0209301404060.82116-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <20020930162948.A50424@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
<<On Mon, 30 Sep 2002 16:29:48 -0700, Juli Mallett <jmallett@FreeBSD.org> said:

> Because you want the most immediate thing, think about recieving SIGSTOP
> while you have other signals queued.

Except that for POSIX Real-Time Signals (those numbered between
SIGRTMIN and SIGRTMAX) you *must* have the lowest-numbered one,
regardless of when it was queued.

I personally see no reason to abandon the old signal bitmaps, even
with an implementation of Real-Time Signals.  Please look carefully at
what POSIX requires an implementation to do for RTS.  (One of the
Stevens books also contains a good summary.)

-GAWollman


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?200210010446.g914kTQJ048155>