From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Tromey Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: the state of the concurrency branch Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2013 21:54:53 -0600 Message-ID: <874na9talu.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> References: <87vc2t7erx.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83txicffpe.fsf@gnu.org> <87haeb3lwp.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83mwo3f762.fsf@gnu.org> <831u5dg4xz.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1377748511 16961 80.91.229.3 (29 Aug 2013 03:55:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2013 03:55:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: lekktu@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 29 05:55:13 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VEtKD-00086Z-1T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Aug 2013 05:55:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39668 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VEtKC-0002oT-L7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:55:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41701) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VEtK4-0002kj-GG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:55:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VEtJy-0008LJ-Hd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:55:04 -0400 Original-Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55971) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VEtJy-0008Kw-9l; Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:54:58 -0400 Original-Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r7T3st8O024481 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:54:55 -0400 Original-Received: from barimba (ovpn-113-142.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.142]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r7T3srVj015058 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 28 Aug 2013 23:54:54 -0400 X-Attribution: Tom In-Reply-To: <831u5dg4xz.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 28 Aug 2013 19:23:20 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 10.5.11.12 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:163084 Archived-At: >> . Will the handling of SIGCHLD be thread-specific or global? IOW, if >> a thread fires up a subprocess, which exits while another thread is >> running, which thread(s) will get the signal? If the signal >> arrives at some other thread, how will that thread know to handle >> it, if it doesn't watch the corresponding fd's? Eli> Please answer this question, if you can: I need the answer to analyze Eli> what, if any, changes are needed in how Emacs on Windows handles Eli> process demise and emulates SIGCHLD. Currently, we watch all of the Eli> subprocesses inside the 'pselect' call; the question is: should we Eli> only watch those of them that are relevant to the thread that calls Eli> 'pselect'. I have to look into it and I haven't found the time. I will try to get to it soon. It's possible that it is just an oversight on my part; however I would say that the goal is that if a process is locked to a particular thread then that thread should also invoke the process sentinel; beyond that I am less clear on the issue. Tom