linux-kernel - Re: A better interface, perhaps: a timed signal flag

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-id: <44CBA91A.5030704@shaw.ca>
Date:	Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:29:46 -0600
From:	Robert Hancock <hancockr@...w.ca>
To:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>, Theodore Tso <tytso@....edu>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Segher Boessenkool <segher@...nel.crashing.org>,
	Dave Airlie <airlied@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	a.zummo@...ertech.it, jg@...edesktop.org
Subject: Re: A better interface, perhaps: a timed signal flag

Steven Rostedt wrote:
> There's also something else that would be a nice addition to the kernel
> API.  A sleep and wakeup that is implemented without signals. Similar to
> what the kernel does with wake_up.  That way you can sleep till another
> process/thread is done with what it was doing and wake up the other task
> when done, without the use of signals.  Or is there something that
> already does this?

For between threads, this is what the POSIX pthread API is for 
(pthread_cond_wait and friends) which is implemented using futexes these 
days..

-- 
Robert Hancock      Saskatoon, SK, Canada
To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@...pamshaw.ca
Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/