From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 23 06:12:29 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6E03DBC for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 06:12:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gonzo@id.bluezbox.com) Received: from id.bluezbox.com (id.bluezbox.com [88.198.91.248]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F2A58FC0C for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 06:12:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [207.6.254.8] (helo=[192.168.1.67]) by id.bluezbox.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.77 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1TbmUu-000D14-BC for arch@freebsd.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:12:22 -0800 From: Oleksandr Tymoshenko Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [RFC] sema_wait_sig Message-Id: Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2012 22:12:02 -0800 To: arch@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Sender: gonzo@id.bluezbox.com X-Spam-Level: -- X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "id.bluezbox.com", has identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see The administrator of that system for details. Content preview: Hello, Is there any particular reason FreeBSD does not have sema_wait_sig function? It seems to be easily implementable using cv_wait_sig function. The reason I'm asking is that I'm getting some Linux drivers ported to FreeBSD and the code in question relies on semaphores and there is no obvious alternative to down_interruptible function. I realize that not all approaches to driver development are easily mappable from OS to OS but in this case lack of cv_wait_sig seems like gap in API. Unless of course there is strong rationale behind it. [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 06:12:30 -0000 Hello, Is there any particular reason FreeBSD does not have sema_wait_sig function? It seems to be easily implementable using cv_wait_sig function. The reason I'm asking is that I'm getting some Linux drivers ported to FreeBSD and the code in question relies on semaphores and there is no obvious alternative to down_interruptible function. I realize that not all approaches to driver development are easily mappable from OS to OS but in this case lack of cv_wait_sig seems like gap in API. Unless of course there is strong rationale behind it. Thank you