Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 1 Sep 2008 17:48:44 -0700 | From | "Ulrich Drepper" <> | Subject | Re: Rationale for paccept() sigset argument? |
| |
On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 9:50 AM, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@googlemail.com> wrote: > What is the rationale for the sigset argument of paccept()?
accept, like select/poll, is used often as a function to dealy operation. Unlike read, recv, etc, which are handled using O_NONBLOCK and select/poll. pselect/ppoll do not really have a sigset parameter to handle signals in general. You use it to enable special handling in case of blocking. Example: if you want to implement userlevel context switching, you dedicate a signal to wake up any blocked thread. Since accept falls more into the same category than poll, this means the sigset parameter is justified. In theory we could add it to all functions but there is no reason to do this without any other reason to change the interface.
| |