Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 04 Dec 2013 19:03:39 -0800
From:      Colin Percival <cperciva@freebsd.org>
To:        John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Cc:        svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r258894 - head/etc
Message-ID:  <529FED0B.9030702@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <201312040903.19767.jhb@freebsd.org>
References:  <201312032155.rB3LtwfQ008301@svn.freebsd.org> <201312040903.19767.jhb@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 12/04/13 06:03, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Tuesday, December 03, 2013 4:55:58 pm Colin Percival wrote:
>>   The rc system aggressively caches the contents of /etc/rc.conf in order to
>>   improve boot performance; this produces arguably astonishing (non-)results
>>   if /etc/rc.conf is modified during the boot process.
>>   
>>   Since performance considerations make it infeasible to automatically detect
>>   if the cached /etc/rc.conf parameters should be invalidated, provide a
>>   mechanism for explicitly requesting that /etc/rc.conf be reloaded: Catch
>>   SIGALRM and reload /etc/rc.conf if it is received.
> 
> Might have been worth mentioning explicitly why you didn't use SIGHUP in the
> log message (found it in the thread on rc@).

Yeah, I meant to include that but forgot when I actually sat down to write
the commit message.

> ALRM does seem like an odd choice compared to, say, USR1.

SIGUSR1 / SIGUSR2 have always seemed more like "internal API" signals to me
rather than something processes should send to each other.  I have no idea
why I feel this way, but that's why I avoided them.

-- 
Colin Percival
Security Officer Emeritus, FreeBSD | The power to serve
Founder, Tarsnap | www.tarsnap.com | Online backups for the truly paranoid




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?529FED0B.9030702>