On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 11:26:04AM +0100, Marc Lehmann wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 04:49:14PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Would it make sense to support the extended signal handlers > > with the > > Maybe, but > > a) its not really used a lot > b) where it makes most sense is when you do want (or even need) > in-handler reactions > c) you would need to queue the siginfo_t in userspace, something I'd > rather avoid. > d) siginfo_t contents are not in general valid after the signal handler > returns, so in those cases you could not even queue if you wanted
At least for the oplock case it would be very difficult to do all the necessary handling in the signal handler, so you would have to store the data somewhere. If libev would provide an interface to feed data (in the case I'm interested in it would be a file descriptor) into the event loop safely from a signal handler, this should be sufficient. Volker
pgpWLtpsBsvyK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ libev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libev
