From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: why "in_sighandler"? Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:44:39 +0900 Organization: Faculty of Science, Chiba University Message-ID: References: <87psevdhpc.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <44E88FCA.5050705@swipnet.se> <44E9503E.7030609@swipnet.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1156142705 23132 80.91.229.2 (21 Aug 2006 06:45:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 06:45:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 21 08:45:03 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GF3Wr-00005Y-6I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:44:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GF3Wq-0005WK-OP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 02:44:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GF3Wf-0005Vz-Gc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 02:44:45 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GF3Wc-0005Vn-Sj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 02:44:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GF3Wc-0005Vk-MG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 02:44:42 -0400 Original-Received: from [133.82.132.2] (helo=mathmail.math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GF3dw-0005hr-H3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 02:52:17 -0400 Original-Received: from church.math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp (church [133.82.132.36]) by mathmail.math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id F20962CB0; Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:44:39 +0900 (JST) Original-To: Jan =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dj=E4rv?= In-Reply-To: <44E9503E.7030609@swipnet.se> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.14.0 (Africa) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.6 (Marutamachi) APEL/10.6 Emacs/22.0.50 (sparc-sun-solaris2.8) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:58591 Archived-At: >>>>> On Mon, 21 Aug 2006 08:18:38 +0200, Jan Dj=E4rv = said: > I don't like it, because it assumes things are "probably OK" to run > in the signal handler (i.e. pthread_mutex_lock/unlock). I still > think it might hang if a Gnome thread is in mutex_lock and a signal > arrives and then the signal handler also enters mutex_lock. Does it mean the quote from IEEE Std 1003.1 did not convince you? > It is one assumtion against another, neither suggestion is without > flaws (we need SYNC_INPUT for that). No assumption is needed to say that the current code leads to a problem under a certain scenario. Suppose that we abandon emacs_blocked_malloc and so on when HAVE_GTK_AND_PTHREAD is defined. I think it is as safe as other non-GNU-malloc systems where emacs_blocked_malloc and so on are not used, provided that malloc-related functions are thread-safe. What do you think about that? YAMAMOTO Mitsuharu mituharu@math.chiba-u.ac.jp