[issue8407] expose signalfd(2) and pthread_sigmask in the signal module

STINNER Victor report at bugs.python.org
Sat May 7 12:01:00 CEST 2011


STINNER Victor <victor.stinner at haypocalc.com> added the comment:

> I mistakenly removed your pending_signals-2 patch
> I'm really sorry about this, could you re-post it?

No problem, anyway I worked on a new version in the train.

> So, if anything, you shouldn't check for a pending signal [in sigwait]

Right, fixed in the new patch.

--

pending_signals-3.patch:
 - don't check for pending signals in sigwait()
 - pthread_kill() doc: it is not a good idea to say that pthread_kill() with signum=0 can be used to check if a thread identifier is valid => such test does crash (SIGSEGV) on my Linux box. I changed the doc to say that it can be used to check if a thread is still running (which is different).
 - add a dedicated test for sigpending()
 - doc: explain how to get a thread identifier for pthread_kill()
 - don't compile pthread_kill() without threads: you cannot get a valid thread identifier without the _thread module

I think that the patch is ready to be commited. Anyone for a last review? (antoine, neologix?)

----------
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21921/pending_signals-3.patch

_______________________________________
Python tracker <report at bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue8407>
_______________________________________


More information about the Python-bugs-list mailing list