On Nov 20 02:14, Takashi Yano wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Nov 2021 16:53:57 +0100
> Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > On Nov 19 16:51, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > > Isn't that already handled in wait_sig? What's the difference here?
> >
> > ...and where exactly is it waiting 60 secs?
>
> If sending signal to myself with exit_state > ES_EXIT_STARGING,
> wait_for_completion in sig_send() is set to true. Therefore,
> sig_send() waits for pack.wakeup event for WSSC (60000 msec) here:
>
> /* No need to wait for signal completion unless this was a signal to
> this process.
>
> If it was a signal to this process, wait for a dispatched signal.
> Otherwise just wait for the wait_sig to signal that it has finished
> processing the signal. */
> if (wait_for_completion)
> {
> sigproc_printf ("Waiting for pack.wakeup %p", pack.wakeup);
> rc = WaitForSingleObject (pack.wakeup, WSSC);
> ForceCloseHandle (pack.wakeup);
> }
>
> However, thread wait_sig ignores the signal here:
> /* Don't process signals when we start exiting */
> if (exit_state > ES_EXIT_STARTING && pack.si.si_signo > 0)
> continue;
> and does not call SetEvent (pack.wakeup).
>
> As a result, sig_send() hangs for 60 secs.
>
> With this patch, sig_send() does not send signal which will
> be ignored in wait_sig().
Ah, ok, that makes sense. Thanks for the explanation. Please push.
Thanks,
Corinna
