From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10943 invoked by alias); 24 Oct 2008 16:40:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 10827 invoked by uid 22791); 24 Oct 2008 16:40:41 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mtaout3.012.net.il (HELO mtaout3.012.net.il) (84.95.2.7) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:40:01 +0000 Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.126.233.32]) by i_mtaout3.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2004.12) with ESMTPA id <0K99008Y050XLN20@i_mtaout3.012.net.il> for gdb-patches@sourceware.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 18:41:30 +0200 (IST) Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:40:00 -0000 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: generic async event handlers in the event loop, for remote non-stop (was: generic `struct serial' interface pipe for remote non-stop) In-reply-to: <200810241512.55053.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: Pedro Alves Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii Message-id: References: <200810240132.42007.pedro@codesourcery.com> <200810241512.55053.pedro@codesourcery.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2008-10/txt/msg00608.txt.bz2 > From: Pedro Alves > Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:12:54 +0100 > > On Friday 24 October 2008 10:54:36, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > From: Pedro Alves > > > Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 01:32:41 +0100 > > > > > > signal handlers should keep the current behaviour of having high > > > priority in relation to normal events > > > > I don't necessarily disagree, but can you explain why is that? > > Sure! But, do you see a case to change that established behaviour? No, not after your explanation (mostly that they are already delayed at that point). Thanks.