lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [RFC,PATCH 2/2] posix timers: don't discard the signal if the timer was explicitly destroyed
Date
> I am not sure this patch is really needed, please review.

I don't think this is worth doing.

> The previous patch adds the user-visible change. It is not clear to me why
> should we cancel the pending signal sent by the timer after timer_delete().
> Suppose the signal is blocked, pending, the user checks sys_rt_sigpending(),
> destroys the timer and then doesn't see the signal.

So? POSIX says it's unspecified what happens to such a signal, so an
application can't rely on it one way or the other. I don't see any reason
to complicate it further.


Thanks,
Roland


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-22 21:13    [W:0.098 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site