Adam Gundy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I can currently produce this race (without my patch applied) by adding a "Sleep( > 1000 )" > to the USR1 signal handler in ntdll/signal_i386.c. The wineserver is convinced that > the > thread is suspended, but it isn't (sleeping is a bad example - assume that a context > switch occurred, or heavy processing happened before the signal was delivered).
Not sure what you are trying to prove here; if the thread is inside the SIGUSR1 handler then it is already suspended, it doesn't matter if you sleep or not. What matters is how much code it runs before getting the signal. > this 'race' doesn't have ANY effect, because suspending a thread is not a precise > operation - > it doesn't matter whether 1 or 1000 instructions are executed by the > thread before it stops. It certainly matters if the thread never stops, which can easily happen with your patch, since anything can happen to the thread that was supposed to send the SIGUSR1. -- Alexandre Julliard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
