question about which sleep is noted in manual

[MaShimiao]

On 12/23/2014 11:24 AM, MaShimiao wrote:
> On 12/18/2014 02:18 PM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> AC-Safe), the first patch below enables the cleanup handlers required to
>> that end.  This might not sound like such a big deal, but the third
>> patch below elaborates on the reasons why it could be.
>>
>> Before discussion the second patch, is the first patch ok to install?
> 
> I tested with this path and it did work.
> So, this patch looks good to me.

Sorry, I forgot to note when testing I added bits/libc-lock.h to sleep.c.
If not, there will be a warning.
> 
>> implies AC-Unsafe, and I didn't think it would be worth introducing
>> @mtasusig just for this one case, though I might if we choose to go with
>> this.
>>
>> Ok to install on top of the first patch?
> 
> I have a comment on the second patch.
> 
>> -	  __libc_cleanup_pop (0);
>> +  /* Linux will wake up the system call, nanosleep, when SIGCHLD
>> +     arrives even if SIGCHLD is ignored.  We have to deal with it in
>> +     libc, so we block SIGCHLD while sleeping if SIGCHLD shouldn't
>> +     wake us up.  */
>> +  if (__sigprocmask (SIG_BLOCK, &set, &set))
>> +    return -1;
>>  
>> -	  saved_errno = errno;
>> -	  /* Restore the original signal mask.  */
>> -	  (void) __sigprocmask (SIG_SETMASK, &oset, (sigset_t *) NULL);
>> -	  __set_errno (saved_errno);
>> +  if (!__sigismember (arg, SIGCHLD))
> 
> arg is not a defined variable.
> 
> 
> Best regards
> 


-- 
Ma Shimiao
Development Dept.I
Nanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech. Co., Ltd.(FNST)