[lkml]   [2007]   [Feb]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 00/11] ANNOUNCE: "Syslets", generic asynchronous system call support
On Wed, 14 Feb 2007, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:

> Davide Libenzi wrote:
> >> Would this work?
> >>
> >
> > Hopefully the API will simplify enough so that emulation will becomes
> > easier.
> >
> The big question in my mind is how all this stuff interacts with
> signals. Can a blocked syscall atom be interrupted by a signal? If so,
> what thread does it get delivered to? How does sigprocmask affect this
> (is it atomic with respect to blocking atoms)?

Signal context is another thing that we need to transfer to the
return-to-userspace task, in case we switch. Async threads inherit that
from the "main" task once they're created, but from there to the
sys_async_exec syscall, userspace might have changed the signal context,
and re-emerging with a different one is not an option ;)
We should setup service-threds signal context, so that we can cancel them,
but the implementation should be hidden to userspace (that will use
sys_async_cancel - or whatever name - to do that).

- Davide

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2007-02-15 03:11    [W:0.141 / U:1.284 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site