[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: why "in_sighandler"?
From: |
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu |
Subject: |
Re: why "in_sighandler"? |
Date: |
Tue, 22 Aug 2006 16:39:53 +0900 |
User-agent: |
Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.6 (Marutamachi) APEL/10.6 Emacs/22.0.50 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) |
>>>>> On Tue, 22 Aug 2006 08:38:54 +0200, Jan Djärv <address@hidden> said:
> How can it be otherwise? If you only have one program counter, that
> program counter must be changed to the signal handler no matter how
> many threads you have, i.e. any previous execution (regardless of
> thread) is interrupted.
Not-running threads have already been *interrupted* by context
switching. Are they interrupted by a signal again?
> When I say interrupted I mean that the signal handling function
> starts to run. You obviously mean something else. But this is a
> side issue, it has more to do with reentrance of the function
> interrupted rather than which thread is currently running.
I don't understand why non-signalled threads are relevant as long as a
signal handler only executes thread-safe functions. The problem of
async-signal-unsafe function is that a thread that took a lock in the
normal context may try to take the same lock in a signal handler
context. The thread cannot go back to the normal context where the
lock will be released afterwards, but just waits for the lock in the
signal handler. As a result, the thread gets stuck. That's
irrelevant to the other threads.
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu
address@hidden
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, (continued)
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/08/20
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, Jan Djärv, 2006/08/21
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/08/21
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, Jan Djärv, 2006/08/21
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/08/21
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, Jan Djärv, 2006/08/21
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/08/21
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, Jan Djärv, 2006/08/21
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/08/21
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, Jan Djärv, 2006/08/22
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?,
YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu <=
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, Jan Djärv, 2006/08/22
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu, 2006/08/22
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, Jan Djärv, 2006/08/22
- Re: why "in_sighandler"?, Andreas Schwab, 2006/08/22
Re: why "in_sighandler"?, Richard Stallman, 2006/08/21