> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Michel_D=c3=a4nzer?= <[email protected]> > Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 11:18:45 +0900 > > On 13.05.2015 07:39, Daniel Drake wrote: > > The X server frequently deals with SIGIO and SIGALRM interruptions. > > If process execution is inside certain blocking system calls > > when these signals arrive, e.g. with the kernel blocked on > > a contended semaphore, the system calls will be interrupted. > > > > Some system calls are automatically restartable (the kernel re-executes > > them with the same parameters once the signal handler returns) but > > only if the signal handler allows it. > > > > Set SA_RESTART on the signal handlers to enable this convenient > > behaviour. > > The discussion about this on IRC sounded to me like we don't want to do > this for both signals, because at least one of them should interrupt > select(). My guess would be that SIGIO should interrupt select() and > thus shouldn't use SA_RESTART.
Doesn't the "smart" scheduler rely on the interrupt behviour as well? _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
