Common signal handler system call

[mohit verma]

On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:13 AM, Bernd Petrovitsch <
bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at> wrote:

> On Sam, 2011-03-19 at 19:48 +0530, mohit verma wrote: [...]
> >    is there any need of raise() system call if we have kill() system
> > call which  is capable of sending signals to the process itself?
>
> No there is no need. But at least on Fedora 13, `man 2 raise` doesn't
> give anything but `man 3 raise` does. The simple interpretation is that
> that raise() is a C library function and not a system call.
>

Yeah , i almost forgot that. thanks.  But here is a solid example ( i think)
: clone(2) and fork(2) system calls. clone() is internally handled by fork
handlers.

>
> Well, you can implement your idea as a library function too.
> Apart from the "just for fun" factor or to learn how to implement a new
> system call, I see no real gain to move that into kernel.
>

I think it should be there in kernel not because it is my idea but for good
reasons (personally think so).

>
> > Actually there are lots of examples of this type .Some of them are for
> > compatibility  reasons  and still some are "i dont know why." :)
>
> FullACK. The system calls were defined ages ago and who knows now what
> and why people (and *who*) defined it, so some cruft should be expected.
> And since such design decision tend to live for ages, more people should
> throw their thoughts in .....
> [...]
> Bernd
> --
> Bernd Petrovitsch                  Email : bernd at petrovitsch.priv.at
>                     LUGA : http://www.luga.at
>
>


-- 
........................
*MOHIT VERMA*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.kernelnewbies.org/pipermail/kernelnewbies/attachments/20110320/b8ce4165/attachment.html