From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KQPmo-0003pL-JG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:53:26 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KQPmm-0003jt-Lz for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:53:25 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=53172 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KQPmm-0003jb-Gg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:53:24 -0400 Received: from smtp.eu.citrix.com ([62.200.22.115]:10501) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KQPmk-0006A7-TV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 05 Aug 2008 12:53:23 -0400 Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 17:53:21 +0100 From: Samuel Thibault Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] catch signals Message-ID: <20080805165321.GZ4478@implementation.uk.xensource.com> References: <48987B43.4090207@redhat.com> <20080805163519.GV6570@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20080805163519.GV6570@redhat.com> Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Daniel P. Berrange" , qemu-devel@nongnu.org Daniel P. Berrange, le Tue 05 Aug 2008 17:35:19 +0100, a écrit : > I think rather than trying todo anything in the signal handler, > it is safest to just set a flag and have its state checked > and acted upon in the main loop. We can not do that for SIGSEGV/SIGBUS, however. Samuel