Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 16 Mar 2011 08:23:12 -0700
From:      Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com>
To:        David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, standards@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Is pthread_cond_signal(3) man page correct?
Message-ID:  <4D80D5E0.5080302@rawbw.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D6B01DB.9090909@freebsd.org>
References:  <4D6ABA14.80208@rawbw.com> <4D6AC17A.7020505@rawbw.com> <4D6B01DB.9090909@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02/27/2011 18:00, David Xu wrote:
> I think in normal case, pthread_cond_signal will wake up one thread,
> but other events for example, UNIX signal and fork() may interrupt
> a thread sleeping in kernel, and cause pthread_cond_wait to return
> to userland, this is called spurious wakeup, and other events, I
> can not think of yet, but I believe they exist.
>    

Does this mean that pthread_cond_signal can also return EINTR? This 
isn't in pthread_cond_signal(3) either.

Is this the case that all system calls should be assumed to be able to 
return EINTR or only those that have EINTR in their man pages?

Yuri



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D80D5E0.5080302>