Re: [patch 1/4] signalfd v1 - signalfd core ...

[Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>]

On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:

> Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > You have the *choice* to do that:
> >
> > 1) You want standard delivery only:
> >
> >    - Just dont use signalfd
> >
> > 2) you want signalfd only:
> >
> >    - Do a sigprocmask(SIG_BLOCK) of the same mask you pass to signalfd
> >
> > If you want both, you can have it. Race free.
> >   
> 
> It's only usefully race-free if you are guarantee that each signal gets
> delivered once, by one path or the other.  Otherwise you get a
> non-deterministic number of each signal actually delivered - what
> earthly use is that to an application?

As I mentioned above, you do have the option to do that. With basically 
the same kernel-side code. I mean, I could add a flag to signalfd and do 
the blocking inside there, but that's just pushing stuff into the call.



- Davide