On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 03:40:23PM +0300, Paul Irofti wrote:
> > This is my original diff with some twaeks from visa@.
>
> While I think this is a step in the right direction I don't think is the
> proper solution to the problem.
It is not intended as final solution. My problem is that
On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 10:59:54PM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 09, 2018 at 11:27:55AM -0900, Philip Guenther wrote:
> > Those signals are handled by the first thread that
> > > doesn't have them masked. In that case, it should be put on the pending
> > > list of the process and any
On Sun, Jul 1, 2018 at 9:47 AM Joerg Sonnenberger wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 04:21:17PM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> > The problem is that POSIX has signals that are sent to processes
> > and signals sent to individual threads. Our kernel does not support
> > this properly.
>
> Well,
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 04:21:17PM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> The problem is that POSIX has signals that are sent to processes
> and signals sent to individual threads. Our kernel does not support
> this properly.
Well, not exactly. POSIX has synchronous and asynchronous signals. I.e.
On 29/06/18(Fri) 16:21, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 01:54:29PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > > It may happen that the worker thread is in the signal handler and
> > > also blocks the signals.
> >
> > Are you saying that the worker thread modified its mask itself, via
> > a
On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 01:54:29PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> > It may happen that the worker thread is in the signal handler and
> > also blocks the signals.
>
> Are you saying that the worker thread modified its mask itself, via
> a syscall, or that the kernel changed `p_sigmask'?
Unless
On 22/06/18(Fri) 22:37, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since the recent futex(2) changes the posixtestsuite regress does
> not finish within the given time frame. Depending on some races
> tests hang, e.g. this one:
>
>
