[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALGyLagJ1pL=4PBPTp-uzwAnTB_hrZuqW93xUd=45dOKpb3-GA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 10:47:13 +0200
From: Maciek Borzecki <maciek.borzecki@...il.com>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pselect semantics - no EINTR with pending signals
On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...il.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 09:25, Maciek Borzecki <maciek.borzecki@...il.com> wrote:
>> Now, I'm not sure about the semantics of pselect. I'm not saying that
>> the current version is right or wrong, but raising a question if this
>> is really expected (and it did happen to be quite unexpected for me).
>
> The standard says
>
> If sigmask is not a null pointer, then the pselect() function
> shall replace the signal mask of the
> process by the set of signals pointed to by sigmask before
> examining the descriptors, and shall
> restore the signal mask of the process before returning.
>
> The way I read this the kernel does have to give the signal a chance
> to be delivered even if there are file descriptor ready for I/O.
I do agree, otherwise the signal delivery gating functionality of
pselect is not really useful.
I'd submit a patch, provided that current behavior is considered
incorrect. Hopefully userspace would not be affected to the degree
that things would get broken.
--
Maciek Borzecki
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists