From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: igc, macOS avoiding signals Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 16:08:22 +0100 Message-ID: References: <799DDBC5-2C14-4476-B1E0-7BA2FE9E7901@toadstyle.org> <87msgdkt29.fsf@gmail.com> <86h66lnjrt.fsf@gnu.org> <868qrxnfrw.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5ccl2zx.fsf@gmail.com> <875xn0p3l1.fsf@protonmail.com> <86ldvwm190.fsf@gnu.org> <87cyh8nczh.fsf@protonmail.com> <867c7fncom.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4671"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Pip Cet , eller.helmut@gmail.com, spd@toadstyle.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 31 16:08:36 2024 Return-path: 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 ) id 1tSdrI-00016E-4T for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 16:08:36 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tSdrA-0004yS-GF; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:08:31 -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 ) id 1tSdr9-0004wd-61 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:08:27 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wr1-x42c.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42c]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tSdr7-0002Si-KT; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:08:26 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wr1-x42c.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3862ca8e0bbso7843514f8f.0; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:08:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1735657703; x=1736262503; darn=gnu.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+VKS/YTYMd3t2wqZXkYNDYu8UjLmD5HkWEzAzzptWvA=; b=DAGwq6uVFYCwpQtsED9XKOq9EdSaDhshSb1hHK2jdEADDADkFAbPtZAshMhmwd2RiM 0WL9wkpkvWjYYcuP9BQbcxrt7P87zsdv+KupVNKJtoA/lLBoElH4VSKVGskXaOOe7JU4 k0z4XGk+JIlWQjwAkf0RJIcKc71znZG0EW0x+Upwy08OfcWTNIkPUqv4WkKHOofa+riH joNbZ7GPK1SbsVwFSms++VtGc8ofx3chAyhpeqcE05N3RTERjfep3WDKtZV4waq9VUTl t+xcY6Mp6dZRPfPWZho7qNea90qBfABaI06akGNsMxAe5qWqmaI3annYmJuGQjH2+4La TUww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1735657703; x=1736262503; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=+VKS/YTYMd3t2wqZXkYNDYu8UjLmD5HkWEzAzzptWvA=; b=tP/S7iGF/qIPih15k+eyTCw/P55NAmU4jR66qvuHZknr5ShCnadZLAgGS2zEuQp8L0 XV9cpgzRObpJOfyuXk4GpldsPzjZMNewUeA6kfj07enDAc3CNHL2LRahzohM4Gays7An JkMIo8icX7ru+lM1bnVIrWOY7itzMC1c5dSWrppjF+Wrd5Ol/0bRIE+W1FGHgxXgoFxs xrvlDwIYPBgny+BdIlkqfUHXcXhDZ+QeUqjMC48g+ERZCD71zqiAJJwfwmfVDm4MvBqb m+BP65/J7Ai0BwqiVSrB/N9QBn92PeSUza2/b6FtXRbcJkH+B6pu/7/vUD6mkSCV95OY R19A== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVsdg3VaonLMH2xfzH/kQiHwNEEY2VScW+mOsD2jWUd7v1bWDAGRzweVrYRIt/UhZQKVuFOXAfdGtLJNw==@gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwGJru7XCEjXWOR3wnwtIH2SnptTSSNozeh+wi/PFXkcuNWNDMc Ueh2NJY81wjqb0EWHoP/cuU91vsW/CjjmpX8hGtEK6vD4uUbJjiZaBJIwg== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnct7Qdp0Q2r/xXSuvx5JpFiVgal4VnxKvAcz1nRJ3lEZ97e7cUQ0qj75AR/1389 bosv2xGXGgXzmMEJluNEGggja4g3NwnhO1YaZHSFLznbb+2bfWMVYguTln+1h9JJqvvaYc9VlFi SiZM8tDI/CbWIgRuqGYbKgO08hiiNRmKPOk//4e3/NaRzt5trYHHX8u6wYKQE5AN/nDuKEV5p2C HckI8Xt5wSC3h1ezGXJjhACSrptgZirKId6O3yVImaoOmR/0e4sgPdVXG4qDVxZvAYyVZ5Rb2ai iQ9y8a6eGAGZAKiIhpwKEytnei8QQjFg+xTnA/iJHXpYc6iIURRcJdFxp5nSGWWfsQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGy28BAeiqjQfQpECuKgr0NfHJw/XW/BlYFX3Rhm/35obCxh/Bch4rnPCX/lYCIL9Ts9RLAeA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:6d8b:0:b0:385:eb7c:5d0f with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-38a221f2fdemr37225123f8f.26.1735657703217; Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:08:23 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from pro2 (p200300e0b7216c0021e5e367c6afc189.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [2003:e0:b721:6c00:21e5:e367:c6af:c189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a640c23a62f3a-aac0f0652a7sm1589025266b.174.2024.12.31.07.08.22 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 31 Dec 2024 07:08:22 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <867c7fncom.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 31 Dec 2024 16:34:49 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::42c; envelope-from=gerd.moellmann@gmail.com; helo=mail-wr1-x42c.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -10 X-Spam_score: -1.1 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-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:327524 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 14:29:18 +0000 >> From: Pip Cet >> Cc: eller.helmut@gmail.com, gerd.moellmann@gmail.com, spd@toadstyle.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> "Eli Zaretskii" writes: >> >> >> maybe_quit is not a great safe point, it's just the best we have. It's >> >> insufficient if Emacs becomes idle, and how often we call rarely_quit >> >> is quite unpredictable. >> > >> > What about doing that from process_pending_signals? >> >> Yes. The rest of this email is a half-hearted defense of why I didn't >> do that right away. >> >> We certainly want to call it from unblock_to if the count reaches (I >> think that's what you meant?), but I wasn't convinced we wouldn't need a >> shadow signal mask for that. >> >> Merging the pending_signals flag in keyboard.c and the one in igc.c (if >> that's what you meant) sounds like a good idea, too, but needs some more >> thought: if we handle some signals while input is blocked, but not >> others, what should pending_signals be? > > We'd need to add a new function to process_pending_signals, which > would process SIGPROF and maybe also SIGALRM. The signal handlers for > those would then only set a flag (not pending_signals, some other > flag). Perfect. Please put my other mail about get_backtrace on hold.