2 ms·
Synchronous signals can't possibly be delivered via an asynchronous mechanism like epoll. Well, I suppose they could, but only if the thread that tripped the s
by cryptonector 4y ago
Synchronous signals can't possibly be delivered via an asynchronous mechanism like epoll. Well, I suppose they could, but only if the thread that tripped the synchronous signal is put to sleep until some other thread runs a handler for that signal, but this requires APIs that (to my knowledge, except... ptrace) don't exist, and there's no need for them. If you can handle a SIGBUS or SIGSEGV, you don't need to handle them asynchronously, but on the other hand if you can't handle them, then the process will die, so there's just no need to handle these asynchronously.
- sylware 4y agoExactly what I said: this needs clarification. Maybe adding explicitely the 2 flavors of signals.
- cryptonector 4y agoNo, it doesn't need clarification. Synchronous signals are always always synchronous, therefore it's obvious that they cannot be handled asynchronously with <fill-in-the-blank-async-system>. It's really clear. And if you stop to think about why synchronous signals are synchronous, it's even more clear.
- sylware 4y agoI disagree, I think it is not clear enough in POSIX.