Newsgroups: php.internals
Path: news.php.net
Xref: news.php.net php.internals:94415
Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm
Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain mudsite.com designates 209.85.223.180 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAEYWF=7mEsM8wXXpM=d7vLnJRE9a_j7Jns=2P8zr4fOU1WS2eg@mail.gmail.com>
 <BY2PR0201MB17843929BA08BE0DE6E0AF88BF2D0@BY2PR0201MB1784.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
 <BY2PR0201MB1784DDC492D3F62FDDC11AC0BF2D0@BY2PR0201MB1784.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
 <CADVQu1R7sxfbVhY7F37UhphoRM5BzWHd03uZftk4LjDHtyw_aw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADVQu1R7sxfbVhY7F37UhphoRM5BzWHd03uZftk4LjDHtyw_aw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2016 14:20:09 +0000
Message-ID: <CADVQu1Reor-DR3cMgTSNrvJkq3nc889YS1251wnrx_YW5bns=w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>, PHP internals <internals@lists.php.net>, 
	"bishop@php.net" <bishop@php.net>, Joe Watkins <pthreads@pthreads.org>, "davey@php.net" <davey@php.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1140a73ab6b67405370c627a
Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Additional context in pcntl_signal handler (was
 Re: [PHP-DEV] pcntl_signal & sa_siginfo)
From: dave@mudsite.com (David Walker)

--001a1140a73ab6b67405370c627a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 1:49 PM David Walker <dave@mudsite.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 12:26 PM Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com> wrote:
>
>> BTW: I'm not sure what pcntl_sigaction() could return as the "oldact"
>> argument..., so may be the original proposal is good enough.
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Dmitry Stogov <dmitry@zend.com>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 23, 2016 9:02:55 PM
>> *To:* PHP internals; bishop@php.net; Joe Watkins; davey@php.net
>> *Cc:* David Walker
>> *Subject:* Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Additional context in pcntl_signal
>> handler (was Re: [PHP-DEV] pcntl_signal & sa_siginfo)
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> To keep maximum compatibility and eliminate unnecessary additional
>> overhead, I would keep pcntl_signal() unchanged, but add pcntl_sigaction()
>> with the ability to specify the need for the second argument (In the same
>> way as POSIX does).
>>
>>
>> Joe, Davey, when we stop targeting new RFCs for 7.1?
>>
>
>
> Now, this being my first attempt at contributing to internals, I'm not
> well versed on a best-practices on benchmarking to provide metrics to my
> assumption. (advice very welcomed)
>

Having run tests through callgrind there is, as expected, a small bit of
overhead.  The question is, how much overhead can be safely deemed
negligible for ease of the language? In my basic test wherein I just define
an empty function, set the handler, and trigger the signal there is just
over 13m instructions executed.  This change increases the instruction
count by about 2000, or 0.0001%.  I would assume keeping a simple
pcntl_signal() with a single handler is more desirable than mitigating the
slight overhead this introduces.

--
Dave

--001a1140a73ab6b67405370c627a--