Re: Fix signalfd interaction with thread-private signals

[Davide Libenzi]

On Fri, 22 Jun 2007, Nicholas Miell wrote:

> You could just get rid of the process/sighand/whatever reference
> entirely and just make reads on a signalfd always dequeue signals for
> the current thread.

Duh?! ...


> You'd lose the ability to pass signalfds around to other processes, but
> I'm not convinced that is even useful. (But I'm sure somebody smarter
> than me has a valid use case and would love to share :-)

Wasn't it you that bitched (just a few days ago) because multiple threads 
could not use the same signalfd and they (by your initial thought) had to 
create one per thread?



- Davide


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/