From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Jun 30 15:28:06 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9A6337B401
	for <threads@freebsd.org>; Mon, 30 Jun 2003 15:28:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22BA843FAF
	for <threads@freebsd.org>; Mon, 30 Jun 2003 15:28:06 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.8/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h5UMS5AI022713;
	Mon, 30 Jun 2003 18:28:05 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 18:28:05 -0400 (EDT)
From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com
To: David Xu <davidxu@viatech.com.cn>
In-Reply-To: <000701c33f56$9fc98f70$0701a8c0@tiger>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10306301826260.20764-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: threads@freebsd.org
cc: xiong jinshan <xiongjinshan@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: About the kse signal process
X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: deischen@freebsd.org
List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 22:28:07 -0000

On Tue, 1 Jul 2003, David Xu wrote:
> From: "xiong jinshan" <xiongjinshan@yahoo.com>
> > 
> > --- Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 30 Jun 2003, xiong jinshan wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Hi,
> > > >   I am wondering that the following piece of code
> > > > can't work with the unix semantics. I tested it
> > > with
> > > > 5.1 release and i386 arch. By unix sementics, if I
> > > > send the SIGALRM to this running programme, it
> > > should
> > > > be received by the thr_func() only, and print a
> > > prompt
> > > > msg on the console.
> > > 
> > > Yes, only thr_func() should receive the alarm.
> > This is the issue. Nothing printed on the console when
> > I sent the signal SIGALRM, it meant that none of the
> > thread received this signal.
[ ... ]
> 
> Missing alarm() call ?

I noticed that too, but I assumed he knew that.  I sent
the alarm with kill(1) from another shell.

-- 
Dan Eischen