From: tdu AT enter DOT net (Tim Updegrove)
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: Algorithm for integer timing loop
Message-ID: <3921dc0e.611684@news.enter.net>
References: <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000516165428 DOT 25864C-100000 AT is>
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.11/32.235
Lines: 28
Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 23:55:01 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 207.18.10.197
X-Complaints-To: Abuse Role <abuse AT enter DOT net>, We Care <abuse AT newsread DOT com>
X-Trace: newshog.newsread.com 958521301 207.18.10.197 (Tue, 16 May 2000 19:55:01 EDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 May 2000 19:55:01 EDT
Organization: ENTER.net (enter.net)
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

A user of my program may terminate it with a Ctrl+C because they are
impatient waiting for some event or if the program hangs (I'm
implementing timeouts so this will occur less).

I'm not familiar with how to block SIGINT.  Do I need to block it for
the entire program or just before & after calling uclock?

I'm also not familiar with 'signal' and the other 2 items.  I guess
they are ways to terminate programs or at least provide some flag to a
program?

Does anyone know of a "fix" for uclock as Eli has hinted at?

Thank-you for all your help.

On Tue, 16 May 2000 17:00:06 +0300 (IDT), Eli Zaretskii
<eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> wrote:

>A simple solution is to block SIGINT while you run that loop.  You don't 
>really need to stop it with Ctrl-C, do you?  You could, for example, use 
>`signal' and SIG_IGN, or `sigprocmask' for that.
>
>It is also possible that some changes inside `uclock' will make it more 
>robust in these cases (e.g., perhaps there's some command to reset the 
>PIT, and if used inside `uclock', it would restore the virtualized PIT 
>to its normal state).  But I didn't have enoug time to look for such a 
>solution; volunteers are welcome, as usual.