Message-ID: <49370.71.139.37.220.1214099737.squirrel@ruckus.brouhaha.com>
In-Reply-To: <877iciyjcs.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
References: <40921.64.62.206.10.1214006079.squirrel@ruckus.brouhaha.com>
    <877iciyjcs.fsf@basil.nowhere.org>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 18:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Any lightweight way for one thread to force another thread to  
     suspend execution?
From: "Eric Smith" <eric@brouhaha.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "Andi Kleen" <andi@firstfloor.org>
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.13
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT
Importance: Normal
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 692
Lines: 18

Andi wrote:
> Any such mechanism will need a syscall, and it's unlikely that
> any syscall will get much cheaper than a kill(SIGSTOP)

But is there a way for the process sending the SIGSTOP to wait until it
has taken effect?  I need a method to *synchronously* stop another
thread.  That's why I thought I probably needed something more
elaborate than SIGSTOP, though I'd like to minimize the number of
system calls required.

Thanks!
Eric Smith

--
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/