| |||||||||||||
signals without signal stackssignals without signal stacksPosted Mar 15, 2007 16:11 UTC (Thu) by pjones (subscriber, #31722)In reply to: signals without signal stacks by pphaneuf Parent article: Kernel events without kevents
Well, it's not _always_ a bad idea. Consider the SIGPIPE vs db4 problem. If you have a library using both db4 and a network, you sometimes need to block signals - but you still want them to be raised to the caller. With signalfd(), you can do a fairly simple callback system sanely, which you really can't do as cleanly with the old-style signal/sigaction interfaces.
(yeah, arguably you can raise(), but you still have to have a doesn't-do-much signal handler deep in a library, which can get really ugly really fast)
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||||