svn commit: r209595 - head/sys/kern

[Matthew Jacob]

John Baldwin wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 June 2010 9:59:34 am Matthew Jacob wrote:
>   
>> Excuse my ignorance, but aren't signals supposed to be to processes, not 
>> specific threads?
>>     
>
> Not for synchronous events.  For example, when you get a segfault due to a
> NULL pointer the SIGSEGV is sent to the thread that actually segfaulted, not
> any random thread in the process.  Similarly for floating-point exceptions,
> etc.  POSIX also mandates this for SIGPIPE as you can see from this
> description of 'EPIPE' from write(2) and fflush(3):
>
> [EPIPE]
>     An attempt is made to write to a pipe or FIFO that is not open for
>     reading by any process, or that only has one end open. A SIGPIPE signal
>     shall also be sent to the thread.
>
> (Note thread, not process, in other places the language uses process, but it
> specifically uses thread here.)
>
>   

Thanks!