Date: 22 Jun 1998 10:47:38 +0200 From: smoergrd@oslo.geco-prakla.slb.com (Dag-Erling Coidan Smørgrav) To: Marino Ladavac <lada@pc8811.gud.siemens.at> Cc: (Dag-Erling Coidan Sm\xrgrav) <smoergrd@oslo.geco-prakla.slb.com>, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Signals in POSIX threads Message-ID: <rx4btrlrff9.fsf@oslo.geco-prakla.slb.com> In-Reply-To: Marino Ladavac's message of Mon, 22 Jun 1998 10:25:48 %2B0200 (CEST) References: <XFMail.980622102548.lada@pc8811.gud.siemens.at>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Marino Ladavac <lada@pc8811.gud.siemens.at> writes: > However, the thread that does sigwait() on that particular signal will > get it, and nobody else (unless you have another thread sigwait()ing on > that particular signal in which case you are treading the undefined ways. > A nasty issue with sigwait() is that it accepts waits only for a subset > of signals which always have to be asynchronous--it will not wait on SIGFPE, > SIGSEGV and the others which could be delivered through the fault in your > program. These signals will always be delivered to the thread that caused > them (or the currently running thread in case that these signals have been > generated via kill()). Thanks, this was precisely what I was looking for. It doesn't bother me that I can't sigwait() on SIGSEGV and SIGFPE; they're not supposed to occur anyway. -- Dag-Erling Smørgrav - smoergrd@oslo.geco-prakla.slb.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?rx4btrlrff9.fsf>