> v3
Sure. Next time.
> if ... expansion space
Well uclibc does not do that. It defines sigset_t to match the kernel, and
even has a comment about that.
/* A 'sigset_t' has a bit for each signal.
* glibc has space for 1024 signals (!), but most arches supported
* by Linux have 64 signals,
Hi Nicolas,
Nicolas S. Dade wrote,
> This supercedes the previous pselect patch from 16 Dec 2015.
Can you resend next time with PATCH v3 in the subject and
a short Changelog after the comment ---. Thanks.
What you think about Rich comment?
best regards
Waldemar
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 09:05:48PM +0100, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
> Nicolas S. Dade wrote,
>
> > Linux has a pselect syscall since 2.6.something. Using it
> > rather than emulating it with sigprocmask+select+sigprocmask
> > is smaller code, and works properly. (The emulation has
>
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 07:39:19PM -0800, Nicolas S. Dade wrote:
> This supercedes the previous pselect patch from 16 Dec 2015.
>
> Linux has a pselect syscall since 2.6.something. Using it
> rather than emulating it with sigprocmask+select+sigprocmask
> is smaller code, and works properly. (The
Off list a kind person pointed out that the pselect syscall really takes 7
arguments, and that my patch worked (or rather, didn't fail) for me by dumb
luck. Please disregard the original patch. I'll resend a new patch shortly.
-Nicolas S. Dade
___
> real code / testcase
Should be easy yup. With an unpatched uclibc this code hangs in
pselect() because the pending signal fires during the window between the
sigprocmkas() and the select(). A proper pselect() returns with errno EINTR.
Hi Nicolas,
Nicolas S. Dade wrote,
> Linux has a pselect syscall since 2.6.something. Using it
> rather than emulating it with sigprocmask+select+sigprocmask
> is smaller code, and works properly. (The emulation has
> race conditions when unblocked signals arrive before or
> after the select)
