Re: [Gc] STW usage of signals
Ivan Maidanski <ivmai-JGs/[email protected]> Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:20:02 +0300
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.programming.garbage-collection.boehmgc |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Rodrigo, Some time ago I thought about reducing of number of signals used by GC. It should be possible to use same signal for suspend and resume but it seems to add some overhead. If you have some code enabling signal reuse/multiplexing - you are welcome. Regards, Ivan -- Mon 10 Nov 2014, 23:19 +03:00 from Hans Boehm <[email protected]>: IIRC, the main issue is that sigsuspend is specified to be async-signal-safe, while sem_wait is not. Hans On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 9:16 AM, Rodrigo Kumpera < [email protected] > wrote: >Hey Guys, >The mono VM is running short of usable signals on some targets and we're going to do signal multiplexing. >We use the same signal based suspend/resume mechanism as bdwgc and I've been wondering on why sigwait was used instead of a semaphore to implement resume. >This decision was made way way in the past but maybe someone still remember the rationale for it? >-- >Rodrigo >_______________________________________________ >bdwgc mailing list >[email protected] >https://lists.opendylan.org/mailman/listinfo/bdwgc _______________________________________________ bdwgc mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendylan.org/mailman/listinfo/bdwgc _______________________________________________ bdwgc mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendylan.org/mailman/listinfo/bdwgc