From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
X-Original-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@sympa.inria.fr
Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104])
	by sympa.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9BE47EE80
	for <caml-list@sympa.inria.fr>; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:36:45 +0100 (CET)
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  oliver@first.in-berlin.de) identity=pra;
  client-ip=192.109.42.8;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-sender="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  oliver@first.in-berlin.de) identity=mailfrom;
  client-ip=192.109.42.8;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-sender="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
Received-SPF: None (mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr: no sender
  authenticity information available from domain of
  postmaster@einhorn.in-berlin.de) identity=helo;
  client-ip=192.109.42.8;
  receiver=mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr;
  envelope-from="oliver@first.in-berlin.de";
  x-sender="postmaster@einhorn.in-berlin.de";
  x-conformance=sidf_compatible
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AsEIAIYwQ1HAbSoIiWdsb2JhbABDiDG3RoUbAwGBZRYOAQEBFRIUBCSCKgEBBSNmCwkPAgIFIQICDwUYiFgEsB+SdBWBDo0VZBaCFzJhA45EiBaUDg
X-IPAS-Result: AsEIAIYwQ1HAbSoIiWdsb2JhbABDiDG3RoUbAwGBZRYOAQEBFRIUBCSCKgEBBSNmCwkPAgIFIQICDwUYiFgEsB+SdBWBDo0VZBaCFzJhA45EiBaUDg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,850,1355094000"; 
   d="scan'208";a="6637970"
Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8])
  by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 15 Mar 2013 15:36:45 +0100
X-Envelope-From: oliver@first.in-berlin.de
X-Envelope-To: <caml-list@inria.fr>
Received: from first (e178037077.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.178.37.77])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by einhorn.in-berlin.de (8.13.6/8.13.6/Debian-1) with ESMTP id r2FEaile013984
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT)
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:36:44 +0100
Received: by first (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 4A91D15400E6; Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:36:43 +0100 (CET)
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2013 15:36:44 +0100
From: oliver <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Message-ID: <20130315143644.GA4950@siouxsie>
References: <51433085.8090405@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <51433085.8090405@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang_at_IN-Berlin_e.V. on 192.109.42.8
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] signal-unsafety of %!

On Fri, Mar 15, 2013 at 02:30:29PM +0000, Matej Kosik wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> When I compile the attached program
> 
>   (with compilers available directly from Debian's repositories)
> 
> I can observe a (non-deterministic) deadlock.
> 
> When I remove
> 
> 	%!
> 
> from the printf function inside the SIGALRM's handler, the deadlock never seem to occur.
> 
> Obviously, interference can be easily introduced in concurrent programs; I was just surprised that even something like
[...]


Whats going on today?

Use Unix.sigprocmask.

Ciao,
   Oliver