From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] run-command: teach async threads to ignore SIGPIPE Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 01:18:57 -0400 Message-ID: <20160421051856.GA23270@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20160419223945.GA18055@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20160419224941.GB18255@sigill.intra.peff.net> <571861EE.1080202@kdbg.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Sixt X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Apr 21 07:19:07 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1at718-0004BJ-Eq for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 07:19:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751597AbcDUFTB (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 01:19:01 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:53384 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751057AbcDUFTB (ORCPT ); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 01:19:01 -0400 Received: (qmail 8699 invoked by uid 102); 21 Apr 2016 05:19:00 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 01:19:00 -0400 Received: (qmail 5966 invoked by uid 107); 21 Apr 2016 05:18:59 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Thu, 21 Apr 2016 01:18:59 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 21 Apr 2016 01:18:57 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <571861EE.1080202@kdbg.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Apr 21, 2016 at 07:15:26AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote: > Am 20.04.2016 um 00:49 schrieb Jeff King: > >This is our first use of pthread_sigmask, and I think Windows will have > >to come up with something for this in compat/. I don't know how SIGPIPE > >works there at all, so it's possible that we can just turn this into a > >noop. Worst case it could probably block SIGPIPE for the whole process. > > There is no SIGPIPE on Windows. write() always returns EPIPE as if SIGPIPE > was ignored. > > We'll have to make pthread_sigmask() a no-op. Great, thanks for clarifying. We can also #ifdef out the whole block there if it's easier, but it looks like you already have noop implementations for sigset, et al. So adding a noop pthread_sigmask() should be enough. -Peff