Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > When we enter sys_ppoll() we specify needed signals as syscall > parameter, with kevents we will add them into the queue. No, this is not sufficient as I said in the last mail. Why do you completely ignore what others say. The code which depends on the signal does not have to have access to the event queue. If a library sets up an interrupt handler then it expect the signal to be delivered this way. In such situations ppoll etc allow the signal to be generally blocked and enabled only and *ATOMICALLY* around the delays. This is not possible with the current wait interface. We need this signal mask interfaces and the appropriate setup code. Being able to get signal notifications does not mean this is always the way it can and must happen. -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [take19 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: [take19 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
- References:
- Re: [take19 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
- From: "Ulrich Drepper" <[email protected]>
- Re: [take19 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
- From: Evgeniy Polyakov <[email protected]>
- Re: [take19 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
- Prev by Date: Re: debugfs oddity
- Next by Date: [PATCH] scsi: Scsi_Cmnd convertion in aic7xxx_old.c
- Previous by thread: Re: [take19 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
- Next by thread: Re: [take19 0/4] kevent: Generic event handling mechanism.
- Index(es):