Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Mon, 09 Apr 2001 13:34:30 +0100 | | From | Anton Altaparmakov <> | | Subject | Re: Q: process concurrency and sigaction() |
| |
Andi,
Thanks a lot for the explanations! All clear now. (-:
[snip] At 12:45 09/04/01, Andi Kleen wrote: >It's ok, but you don't really need to spin. A flag is enough. Also you >could use the signal blocking function (sigprocmask), but they're slightly >more expensive than just setting a flag.
Yes, good point. Saves me a whole variable in my data structs in fact, as I already have 32 bits worth of mostly unused, atomic flags.
sigprocmask would be rather excessive considering it requires a full context switch into the kernel to execute and the high frequency of lock/unlocks in the normal code while the handler only executes once every 5 seconds...
Best regards,
Anton
-- Anton Altaparmakov <aia21 at cam.ac.uk> (replace at with @) Linux NTFS Maintainer / WWW: http://sourceforge.net/projects/linux-ntfs/ ICQ: 8561279 / WWW: http://www-stu.christs.cam.ac.uk/~aia21/
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |