Subject: Re: proposed fix for pthread_kill() of a zombie thread.
To: Nathan J. Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chuck Silvers <email@example.com>
Date: 10/09/2005 20:28:06
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 05:24:22PM -0400, Nathan J. Williams wrote:
> > pthread_cancel() is supposed to do the ESRCH thing, I'll fix that.
> No, pthread_cancel()'s return value of ESRCH is only listed under "may
> fail", not "shall fail" in SUSv3. The use of "may fail" just means that
> *if* the implementation detects that problem, then it has to use that
> error code - but an implementation is not required to detect the
> condition. Contrast the text in the "Errors" section of
> pthread_cancel() with that of pthread_join(), for example.
ok, then I'll add the checks not required by the standard under
#ifdef ERRORCHECK, which seems to be how such things are done in our code.