Messages in this thread | | | From | Roland McGrath <> | Subject | Re: [RFC,PATCH 2/2] posix timers: don't discard the signal if the timer was explicitly destroyed | Date | Tue, 22 Apr 2008 12:08:49 -0700 (PDT) |
| |
> 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
| |