Re: igc, macOS avoiding signals

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2024 10:09:25 +0000
> From: Pip Cet <pipcet@protonmail.com>
> Cc: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, 
> spd@toadstyle.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> 
> "Helmut Eller" <eller.helmut@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > I wonder if the backtrace that we see in the signal handler is any
> > different from the backrace that we would see at the next safe point
> > (i.e. the next time maybe_quit is called).
> 
> If we keep a shadow signal mask, the only requirement for a safe point
> is that we made some progress OR the lock was released.  But the
> backtrace will change if we wait for the next maybe_quit, IIUC.
> 
> maybe_quit is not a great safe point, it's just the best we have.  It's
> insufficient if Emacs becomes idle, and how often we call rarely_quit is
> quite unpredictable.

What about doing that from process_pending_signals?