Changes by STINNER Victor victor.stin...@haypocalc.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file21735/signal_pthread_sigmask.patch
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8407
___
STINNER Victor victor.stin...@haypocalc.com added the comment:
signal_pthread_sigmask.patch:
- add signal.pthread_sigmask() function with doc and tests
- add SIG_BLOCK, SIG_UNBLOCK, SIG_SETMASK constants
- fix #11859: fix tests of test_io using threads and an alarm: use
pthread_sigmask() to
Changes by STINNER Victor victor.stin...@haypocalc.com:
--
nosy: +haypo
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8407
___
___
STINNER Victor victor.stin...@haypocalc.com added the comment:
sigprocmask or (better) pthread_sigmask is required to fix #11859 bug.
---
Python has a test for broken pthread_sigmask. Extract of configure.in:
AC_MSG_CHECKING(if PTHREAD_SCOPE_SYSTEM is supported)
Michael Schurter m...@schmichael.com added the comment:
Any hopes of getting this into Python 3.3?
--
nosy: +schmichael
versions: +Python 3.3 -Python 2.7
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8407
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
If everyone agrees this is inappropriate for 2.7
I think the decision is up to Benjamin.
--
nosy: +benjamin.peterson
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8407
Benjamin Peterson benja...@python.org added the comment:
Let's leave it for 3.2.
--
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8407
___
___
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
pthread_sigmask should be used instead. I could either expose both of
these and let the caller choose, or I could make signal.sigprocmask use
pthread_sigmask if it's available, and fall back to sigprocmask.
Or perhaps you could disable
Tres Seaver tsea...@agendaless.com added the comment:
Trying pthread_sigmask first, and falling back, seems like the right strategy
to me.
--
nosy: +tseaver
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8407
Jean-Paul Calderone exar...@twistedmatrix.com added the comment:
I think this is ready for a first review. See
http://codereview.appspot.com/1132041. If everyone agrees this is
inappropriate for 2.7, then I'll port the changes to 3.x. I don't expect there
to be much difference in the 3.x
Jean-Paul Calderone exar...@twistedmatrix.com added the comment:
One open question regarding interaction with threading. sigprocmask's behavior
in a multithreaded program is unspecified. pthread_sigmask should be used
instead. I could either expose both of these and let the caller choose,
Changes by Jean-Paul Calderone exar...@twistedmatrix.com:
--
nosy: +gps
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8407
___
___
Changes by Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr:
--
nosy: +gregory.p.smith -gps
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8407
___
___
Jean-Paul Calderone exar...@twistedmatrix.com added the comment:
The one big difference I can see is that set_wakeup_fd() doesn't transmit the
signal number, but this could be fixed if desired (instead of sending '\0',
send a byte containing the signal number).
There's a lot more
Changes by Andrew Bennetts s...@users.sourceforge.net:
--
nosy: +spiv
___
Python tracker rep...@bugs.python.org
http://bugs.python.org/issue8407
___
___
Python-bugs-list
Antoine Pitrou pit...@free.fr added the comment:
I'm with Martin, better to target 3.2 IMO.
Does signalfd really bring something compared to set_wakeup_fd()?
The one big difference I can see is that set_wakeup_fd() doesn't transmit the
signal number, but this could be fixed if desired (instead
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de added the comment:
Notice that 2.7 has seen its first beta release, so no new features are allowed
for it. I think it's better to target this feature for 3.2.
--
nosy: +loewis
___
Python tracker
17 matches
Mail list logo
