I have just added this issue to the Knowlege Base at http://qnd.qnx.com.
You can find the solution to this issue, by searching on “siginfo.h”.
You’ll also find the answer at the following link:
I have just added this issue to the Knowlege Base at > http://qnd.qnx.com> .
You can find the solution to this issue, by searching on “siginfo.h”.
You’ll also find the answer at the following link:
All part of our cunning plan to get people not to use that event type > > .
why don’t use this event type ?
Creating a thread is a relatively heavyweight operation. Doing it in
response to a sigevent (which typically wants fast response) is generally
a bad idea - there is almost always a better way of writing the code.
E.g. Create a channel and use the dispatch_* functions to have a pool
of threads that block on it waiting for a SIGEV_PULSE event. If you’re
a resource manager (as all true thinking Neutrino programs should be ,
you already have the pool of threads sitting around.
All part of our cunning plan to get people not to use that event type > > .
why don’t use this event type ?
Well, the latency is really bad – it has to create a new thread to
handle the event.
And, the side-effect of making a mistake with the frequency of generating
the event is… unfortunate… kind of like shooting yourself in the foot
with a machine gun. Can you imagine attaching this event to a moderately
high frequency interrupt? Hm… a new thread every millisecond. Fun.