From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: SIGPROF + SIGCHLD and igc
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 15:05:06 +0200
Message-ID: <86ed1x2pvh.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <87o713wwsi.fsf@telefonica.net> <87ldw7fwet.fsf@protonmail.com>
 <m2ttavl9wy.fsf@gmail.com> <87a5cnfj8t.fsf@protonmail.com>
 <86seqe4j4f.fsf@gnu.org> <87ttaucub8.fsf@protonmail.com>
 <m2pllifmj2.fsf@gmail.com> <87pllicrpi.fsf@protonmail.com>
 <m2ldw6fg51.fsf@gmail.com> <864j2u442i.fsf@gnu.org>
 <m27c7qf7lt.fsf@gmail.com> <m2o711ehx2.fsf_-_@gmail.com>
 <87ldw55w28.fsf@gmail.com>
Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214";
	logging-data="25030"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io"
Cc: gerd.moellmann@gmail.com, pipcet@protonmail.com, ofv@wanadoo.es,
 emacs-devel@gnu.org, acorallo@gnu.org
To: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 24 14:05:52 2024
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17])
	by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
	(Exim 4.92)
	(envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org>)
	id 1tQ4bg-0006Jd-4q
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 24 Dec 2024 14:05:52 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
	(envelope-from <emacs-devel-bounces@gnu.org>)
	id 1tQ4b1-0008Uv-8X; Tue, 24 Dec 2024 08:05:11 -0500
Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>) id 1tQ4b0-0008Uj-Ef
 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Dec 2024 08:05:10 -0500
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e])
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <eliz@gnu.org>)
 id 1tQ4az-0002u9-GD; Tue, 24 Dec 2024 08:05:09 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org;
 s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date:
 mime-version; bh=F0NuZev5vHlxCeFvzNlr8cPS4AnLzMMNc+7QlS4bdZg=; b=VQ1rw3s0PsS0
 bxi3qrubG2zv5eDvwjY3/33/tTTCRoAnDo4Y5MUOiyN2E1AlNwyZFEdMn/hvPR7muOqdydTjWhGIy
 oSC+8dyd1dAIX5Oqu+sWLQGlAV0x/HHw4eRWGJlzDN7y49Z7WlSbeEAyuodtBRhym5ZHPd2DFJb0W
 yRc5++Rv0hQG0gJWZWOYFcGQhZ+MCTc/9xqE50lcbkKzbcTy5CBPOWOjBnl9q1DE6fREYHr5qShwi
 tU6ohLvH7Ycc1Io7vpq4IoHDNskhcjIkgajenhdIDpEkmhBSHQDjs7lc1IKZNSGh6piCNlvCuRxCp
 7wzwkgZEBugBdMzeauEvSA==;
In-Reply-To: <87ldw55w28.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Helmut Eller on Tue, 24
 Dec 2024 09:23:11 +0100)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
 <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:327004
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/327004>

> From: Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>,  pipcet@protonmail.com,  ofv@wanadoo.es,
>   emacs-devel@gnu.org,  acorallo@gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 09:23:11 +0100
> 
> I think, SIGIO might cause trouble.

Why do you think so?  Its handler does almost nothing, just sets a
flag (if you ignore the Android-specific stuff there).

> But that async IO code in process.c is sooo hard to read.  I wonder
> if it would be simpler with threads, e.g. one thread per
> Lisp_Process.

Heh, see w32proc.c.