Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Feb 2000 19:15:22 -0800 | From | Dan Kegel <> | Subject | Re: accept() improvements for rt signals |
| |
Zach Brown wrote: > When I first ran into the interesting 'race' in queued sigio signals > (local close causing HUP then IN in 2.2) I freaked out and over-implemented > things in the io core I was playing with to deal with strangeness > in the signal queue. I was placing way too much faith in the validity > of the signals in the queue. > > to really do a robust io core with queued rt sigio signals stephen and > andi have convinced me that you really, really have to treat the signals > as hints. You _have_ to keep local io core state of the descriptors > you care about and just treat the signal stream as hints to their state. > Thankfully in 2.3+ we can assume that a SIGHUP will be the last signal > queued for the lifetime of a descriptor so this becomes relatively > straight forward.
Well, Zach should know. If he thinks that inaccurate hints from the OS are not a burden, I guess us app developers can stop worrying and start implementing sigio support. - Dan "Chicken Little" Kegel
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |