Re: [9fans] syscall silently kill processes

[adr <adr@SDF.ORG>]

On Sat, 18 Jun 2022, andrey100100100@gmail.com wrote:

> ---------------------------------------------
>
> cpu% 6.out | grep end | wc -l
>     33
>
>
> Problem in unregistered handlers.

But unregistered handlers shouldn't be a problem. The process is
been killed when alarm sends the note. That's why the code worked
removing the read statement, the alarm is set off and the note is
not sent before the process ends. I just don't see why the process
is been killed. The documentation describes another behaivor. To
me it smells like bug barbecue (corrupted onnote?). Maybe I got
something wrong, bear with me.

>> Note that you could register the handler in threadmain and avoid
>> completely this issue, but as I said before, something seems wrong
>> to me here.
>
> I'm don't understand how handler in threadmain would solve the problem.
> I need in 'alarm' on per process basis.

You need alarm() in every process, but you don't need to register the
same handler 80 times!

adr.

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tfa6823048ad90a21-M62a1f2e8578fcd812c35b4b5
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription