in reply to Re^3: The implementation of SIGHUP in Win32 Perl
in thread The implementation of SIGHUP in Win32 Perl
It is always executed in a separate thread in every NT OS, not just Vista.
Ah, that's good to know, thanks.
The multi-threading of the console event dispatch often can cause assert fails and crashes from Perl if Perl is in a 100% CPU usage loop on a multi core machine.
That makes sense. So basically we were all just lucky that the other two event triggered signals, SIGINT and SIGBREAK worked. Which validated the advice "don't do too much in your signal handler," because the more you did (or the busier your machine), the more likely you would be to run into a thread conflict causing a crash.
I looked at the thread context and APC stuff, but both those topics are over my head, I'm afraid. All I was thinking about was to simply "re-throw" the event signals (by "posting" a WM_USER_KILL message from the message handling thread appropriate for the signal to "handle") instead of calling back into Perl. What I wonder about, and perhaps you can help with is this side of the win32.c signal code:
case WM_USER_KILL: { /* We use WM_USER_KILL to fake kill() with other signals */ int sig = (int)wParam; if (do_raise(aTHX_ sig)) sig_terminate(aTHX_ sig); return 1; }
Do you know of any issues with that side of the code? I was thinking it would trigger the $SIG{ 'HUP' } in the same thread as the perl interpreter. If that's true, then what I wanted to do might have a chance of working. Anyway, thanks for the feedback.
|
---|
Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
---|---|
Re^5: The implementation of SIGHUP in Win32 Perl
by bulk88 (Priest) on Sep 04, 2013 at 19:43 UTC | |
by klaten (Novice) on Sep 05, 2013 at 17:27 UTC | |
by bulk88 (Priest) on Sep 07, 2013 at 17:22 UTC | |
by klaten (Novice) on Sep 11, 2013 at 19:56 UTC | |
by Anonymous Monk on Sep 11, 2013 at 22:21 UTC | |
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Sep 11, 2013 at 22:45 UTC | |
|