Re: [asterisk-dev] Question about hup_handler & deadlocks

[Jay Hoover]

Thanks, that makes sense. One thing that I don't understand is what situations in normal Asterisk operation would cause a SIGHUP to get sent to the daemon. I'm getting a lot of these deadlocks, and I'm suspicious that there is a problem somewhere else causing me to get an abnormal volume of SIGHUPs. I will do more tracing to track that down, but do you know of anything in normal operation that would cause a large volume of SIGHUPs?

Thanks for the help,

Jay

On 9/24/06, Tilghman Lesher <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:

On Saturday 23 September 2006 22:18, Jay Hoover wrote:
> Can anyone enlighten me about why ast_module_reload needs to be
> called from the SIGHUP handler? I see that this was added quite a
> few years ago (may '01), but I can't find anything in the code that
> explains the reasoning behind it.

Generally speaking, SIGHUP on many daemon processes today causes the
configuration files to be re-read.  The 'reload' routine in modules
generally does that operation.  Given that we have an alternative
method of effecting a reload from the bash command line ('asterisk -rx
reload'), I don't see the handling of SIGHUP in this way to be
critical.

--
Tilghman
_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

_______________________________________________
--Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev