Re: [Jack-Devel] jack1 version jack2 public headers comparison

PrevNext  Index
DateSat, 25 Feb 2012 21:10:08 +0100
From [hidden] at linutronix dot de <[hidden] at linutronix dot de
ToStéphane Letz <[hidden] at grame dot fr>
CcJACK <[hidden] at lists dot jackaudio dot org>
In-Reply-ToStéphane Letz Re: [Jack-Devel] jack1 version jack2 public headers comparison
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 06:55:23PM +0100, Stéphane Letz wrote:
> 
> Le 24 févr. 2012 à 18:36, [hidden] a écrit :
> 
> >>> Reworked :
> >>> ==========
> >>> 
> >>> /jackctl_sigmask_t *
> >>> jackctl_setup_signals(
> >>>    unsigned int flags);
> >>> 
> >>> void
> >>> jackctl_wait_signals(
> >>>    jackctl_sigmask_t * signals);
> >> 
> >> can you or nedko explain the need for this change? again, since its
> >> for the control API the issue is not that significant but i recall
> >> that this part of the API attracted some significant criticism from
> >> torben.
> > 
> > This stuff is not necessary.
> > the signal handling is an implementation detail, and should be hidden
> > below the control api.
> > 
> > jack1 controlapi.c is doing it correctly. 
> > please switch jack2 to doing the same thing.
> 
> I don't see the difference in the code... Can you explain more?

jack_setup_signals() blocks all signals, because the threads which
jackctl_server_start() creates dont want to reply to signals.

then jack_wait_signals() reactivates them.

these function names are completely misleading.

just look where jack1 would be blocking the signals, and where jack2 is
doing it.



-- 
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Torben Hohn

Linutronix GmbH

Standort: Bremen

Phone: +49 421 166 73 41 ; Fax.: +49 7556 919 886
mailto: [hidden]
Firmensitz / Registered Office: D-88690 Uhldingen, Auf dem Berg 3
Registergericht / Local District Court: Freiburg i. Br., HRB Nr. / Trade
register no.: 700 806;

Geschäftsführer / Managing Directors: Heinz Egger, Thomas Gleixner
PrevNext  Index

1330200628.23770_0.ltw:2,a <20120225201007.GA18457 at lxhb dot hb dot de>