Re: [Libevent-users] Sigprocmask vs pthread_sigprocmask

2007-02-24 Thread Scott Lamb
On Feb 22, 2007, at 6:32 PM, Niels Provos wrote: Do you have an addition to the regression test that would allow me to verify that the new code works as intended? If not, it would be most appreciated :-) Happy Weekend, everyone. Looking at this again. There are two regression tests for thi

Re: [Libevent-users] Sigprocmask vs pthread_sigprocmask

2007-02-24 Thread Niels Provos
On 2/24/07, Scott Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There are two regression tests for this now: Great. But you're referring to something more...proving that there would have been an evsignal_process() race if not for the reordering, right? That's hard to do through regression tests. I can thin

Re: [Libevent-users] Sigprocmask vs pthread_sigprocmask

2007-02-24 Thread Scott Lamb
On Feb 24, 2007, at 12:49 PM, Niels Provos wrote: I know that it's difficult to get complete coverage, but some tests for each new change are a very good practice. Well, at least the test_immediatesignal() fails with the old code and passes with the new code. I would love to get coverage