Re: TASK_UN/INTERRUPTIBLE

[Jan Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>]

On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 06:13:19PM +0200, Frank A. Uepping wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 July 2003 22:18, Jan Hudec wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 08:56:48PM +0200, Frank A. Uepping wrote:
> > > set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE):
> > > Does this mean that the process is going to sleep,
> > > but can be awaken by delivery of a signal?
> > >
> > > set_current_state(TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE):
> > > Does this mean that the process is going to sleep,
> > > but can NOT be awaken by delivery of a signal?
> >
> > Exactly.
> >
> > (note: the process will actualy go to sleep when schedule() is called
> > - that allows wait_queues to work without locking).
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >---- Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>
> How can I notice that a signal has been delivered in the case of
> set_current_state(TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE); schedule()/_timeout();
> ??

Call signal_pending(current). (returns true if signal should be handled,
false otherwise).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>
--
Kernelnewbies: Help each other learn about the Linux kernel.
Archive:       http://mail.nl.linux.org/kernelnewbies/
FAQ:           http://kernelnewbies.org/faq/