Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 17:50:17 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 17:49:21 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:1296 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 13 Feb 2003 17:48:45 -0500 Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 14:54:54 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Davide Libenzi cc: Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Synchronous signal delivery.. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1231 Lines: 31 On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > It does not have necessarily to be just another ioctl/fcntl, it can be a > write. About security, chages might be allowed only to the task that > created the fd, if you're concerned. It's not that someone will starve > w/out such functionality though. I'd actually like to reserve writes to _sending_ signals. Especially if you have another process that listens in on the signals you get, it might want to also force the signals through. > > One of the reasons for the "flags" field (which is not unused) was because > > I thought it might have extensions for things like alarms etc. > > I was thinking more like : > > int timerfd(int timeout, int oneshot); It could be a separate system call, but since the infrastructure is hopefully identical (most of the sigfd() code is actually creating the fs infrastructure to get an inode with the information), it should share a lot of the paths. Maybe even the system call. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/