Message135436
| Author |
vstinner |
| Recipients |
benjamin.peterson, exarkun, gregory.p.smith, loewis, marcin.bachry, neologix, pitrou, python-dev, schmichael, spiv, tseaver, vstinner |
| Date |
2011年05月07日.10:00:57 |
| SpamBayes Score |
3.5305092e-14 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1304762460.2.0.823890484797.issue8407@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
> 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?) |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2011年05月07日 10:01:01 | vstinner | set | recipients:
+ vstinner, loewis, gregory.p.smith, spiv, exarkun, tseaver, pitrou, benjamin.peterson, marcin.bachry, schmichael, neologix, python-dev |
| 2011年05月07日 10:01:00 | vstinner | set | messageid: <1304762460.2.0.823890484797.issue8407@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2011年05月07日 10:00:59 | vstinner | link | issue8407 messages |
| 2011年05月07日 10:00:59 | vstinner | create |
|