Subj : Re: nptl and signals
To   : comp.programming.threads
From : Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
Date : Thu Jul 28 2005 01:07 pm

Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk> writes:

> Handling signals synchronously in one dedicated thread is much
> superior because you are not restricted to async-signal-safe
> functions only. You can use any function which is thread safe
> (which includes practically all system calls).

Well, except when I want the signal to interrupt what a given thread
is already doing. If the signal is handled by a separate thread, the
threads must synchronize regularly so one can interrupt the other.
If it's handled with a signal handler, it can change a volatile flag
which doesn't need inter-thread synchronization.

-- 
   __("<         Marcin Kowalczyk
   \__/       qrczak@knm.org.pl
    ^^     http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/

.