signal handling question


 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Top Forums Programming signal handling question
# 1  
Old 05-27-2008
signal handling question

Hello all,

I am starting to learn signal handling in Linux and have been trying out some simple codes to deal with SIGALRM. The code shown below sets a timer to count down. When the timer is finished a SIGALRM is produced. The handler for the signal just increments a variable called count. This is repeated until the user hits ‘q' in the keyboard. The code is shown below:
Code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

void my_action(int);

int count = 0;

int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
	struct sigaction sigalrm_action;
	struct itimerval timer;
	
	timer.it_interval.tv_sec = 0;	//Deal only in usec
	timer.it_interval.tv_usec = 1000;
	timer.it_value.tv_sec = 0;	//Deal only in usec
	timer.it_value.tv_usec = 1000;	

	sigalrm_action.sa_handler  = my_action;	
	sigemptyset(&sigalrm_action.sa_mask);
	sigalrm_action.sa_flags = 0;
	
	sigaction(SIGALRM, &sigalrm_action, 0);				

	printf("Hit any key to start, q to exit\n");	
	getchar();	
    	
	if(setitimer(ITIMER_REAL, &timer,NULL) != 0){
		perror("Error starting timer");
		exit(1);
	}    	
	while(getchar()!= 'q');	
	printf("Bye bye\n");
	return 0;
}

void my_action(int signum)
{	
	count++;
	printf("Count is %d\n", count);	
}

The problem I am facing is this, when I set the timer for 1000000usec it works fine (i.e 1sec). However if I keep reducing the usec time to 100000, 10000, 1000 etc the timing seems to be too slow. The count variable is not being incremented as fast as it should be. Why is this? I have a hunch I am doing some silly mistake here but I am not sure what it is.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Last edited by Yogesh Sawant; 05-27-2008 at 03:11 AM.. Reason: added code tags
# 2  
Old 05-27-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by fox_hound_33
Hello all,

I am starting to learn signal handling in Linux and have been trying out some simple codes to deal with SIGALRM. The code shown below sets a timer to count down. When the timer is finished a SIGALRM is produced. The handler for the signal just increments a variable called count. This is repeated until the user hits ‘q’ in the keyboard. The code is shown below:
Code:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <unistd.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <sys/time.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

void my_action(int);

int count = 0;

int main(int argc, char** argv)
{
	struct sigaction sigalrm_action;
	struct itimerval timer;
	
	timer.it_interval.tv_sec = 0;	//Deal only in usec
	timer.it_interval.tv_usec = 1000;
	timer.it_value.tv_sec = 0;	//Deal only in usec
	timer.it_value.tv_usec = 1000;	

	sigalrm_action.sa_handler  = my_action;	
	sigemptyset(&sigalrm_action.sa_mask);
	sigalrm_action.sa_flags = 0;
	
	sigaction(SIGALRM, &sigalrm_action, 0);				

	printf("Hit any key to start, q to exit\n");	
	getchar();	
    	
	if(setitimer(ITIMER_REAL, &timer,NULL) != 0){
		perror("Error starting timer");
		exit(1);
	}    	
	while(getchar()!= 'q');	
	printf("Bye bye\n");
	return 0;
}

void my_action(int signum)
{	
	count++;
	printf("Count is %d\n", count);	
}

The problem I am facing is this, when I set the timer for 1000000usec it works fine (i.e 1sec). However if I keep reducing the usec time to 100000, 10000, 1000 etc the timing seems to be too slow. The count variable is not being incremented as fast as it should be. Why is this? I have a hunch I am doing some silly mistake here but I am not sure what it is.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Hi,
Just a thought but i might be totally wrong/out of subject: i suspect it has to do with linux timer resolution which is at 10ms (or not?) so no matter how small you set your interval your code will only be ran every 10ms ...

PS.: You query remind me of a "nice surprise" when i was working with timer on linux Smilie
# 3  
Old 05-27-2008
andryk is right - alarm timer expiry (SIGALRM) will be delivered to the process, but only when the process has enough priority to be awakened. In other words, if you ask for 10ms sleep time on a busy system, your alarm will be instantiated after 10ms, guaranteed, but the time when your process gets a turn at the CPU is NOT guaranteed, unless your process has elevated (realtime) priority. You have to wait for other processes to give up the CPU before you get it back, and process the signal. This becomes a problem on a busy system, or when the duration of the wait is less than a quantum slice and there is a least one other process that needs the cpu.

I really don't recommend it, but on a busy system you may have to nice your program up to a very high prioity to get the results you asked for.
# 4  
Old 05-27-2008
I get what you guys mean.

I ran some test code using usleep and found some interesting results.
When i put usleep to 0.1secs, the actual sleeping time varies from the set point (0.1secs) with an error of about +5%. The same error percentage jumps to about +40% when i put usleep to 0.01sec and the same error jumps to about +300%(!!!!) when i put usleep to 0.001sec.

Looks like as the timer resolution is brought down the error keeps increasing. Could be due to system timer resolution as mentioned as well as the priority based scheduling employed by linux.

Anyway thanks a lot guys.
# 5  
Old 05-27-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by andryk
Hi,
Just a thought but i might be totally wrong/out of subject: i suspect it has to do with linux timer resolution which is at 10ms (or not?) so no matter how small you set your interval your code will only be ran every 10ms ...

PS.: You query remind me of a "nice surprise" when i was working with timer on linux Smilie
Regarding the timer resolution, refer to time(7) in the man pages. Looks like the resolution can be configured from kernel 2.6.13 onwards. A snippet:

"since kernel 2.6.13, the HZ value is a kernel configuration parameter and can be 100, 250 (the default) or 1000, yielding a jiffies value of, respectively, 0.01, 0.004, or 0.001 seconds."
# 6  
Old 05-28-2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by fox_hound_33
Regarding the timer resolution, refer to time(7) in the man pages. Looks like the resolution can be configured from kernel 2.6.13 onwards. A snippet:

"since kernel 2.6.13, the HZ value is a kernel configuration parameter and can be 100, 250 (the default) or 1000, yielding a jiffies value of, respectively, 0.01, 0.004, or 0.001 seconds."
Cool, thanks for sharing the info!
# 7  
Old 05-31-2008
Interesting!

This kind of seems to maintain the integrity which is definitely needed.

I have a question - might be foolish.

So, the process when its sleeping is in the 'sleep' state and after SIGALRM moves to 'ready_to_run' state and gets a slot in one of the scheduled queues based on the priority.

So, now what happens to the process ( A ) when there is some information / signal delivered to the process ( A ) which is in the run queue but not actually running ?

How is the kernel managing this ? Just because some other process ( B ) is urging the current process ( A ) for some reply, process ( A ) can't jump ahead of its run queue and start running.
Login or Register to Ask a Question

Previous Thread | Next Thread

10 More Discussions You Might Find Interesting

1. Programming

problem in reforking and signal handling

hi friends i have a problem in signal handling ... let me explain my problem clearly.. i have four process .. main process forks two child process and each child process again forks another new process respectively... the problem is whenever i kill the child process it is reforking and the... (2 Replies)
Discussion started by: senvenugopal
2 Replies

2. UNIX and Linux Applications

SIGSEGV Signal handling

Hello, Can anybody tell me how can i handle segmentation fault signal, in C code? (2 Replies)
Discussion started by: mustus
2 Replies

3. Programming

problem in SIGSEGV signal handling

i wrote handler for sigsegv such that i can allocate memory for a variable to which sigsegv generated for illlegal acces of memory. my code is #include <signal.h> #include<stdio.h> #include<stdlib.h> #include<string.h> char *j; void segv_handler(int dummy) { j=(char *)malloc(10); ... (4 Replies)
Discussion started by: pavan6754
4 Replies

4. Programming

Signal handling

I am trying to write a small program where I can send signals and then ask for an action to be triggered if that signal is received. For example, here is an example where I am trying to write a programme that will say you pressed ctrl*c when someone presses ctrl+c. My questions are what you would... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: #moveon
1 Replies

5. Programming

Signal Handling and Context Switches

Hi guys, this is my first posting, so at first hi to everyone! ;) I have a problem with ucontext_t in connection with signal handling. I want to simulate a preemptive scheduler. I am using the iTimer with ITIMER_PROF, to schedule the interrupts. You find the code below: #include <stdio.h>... (18 Replies)
Discussion started by: XComp
18 Replies

6. Programming

signal handling while in a function other than main

Hi, I have a main loop which calls a sub loop, which finally returns to the main loop itself. The main loop runs when a flag is set. Now, I have a signal handler for SIGINT, which resets the flag and thus stops the main loop. Suppose I send SIGINT while the program is in subloop, I get an error... (1 Reply)
Discussion started by: Theju
1 Replies

7. Shell Programming and Scripting

Signal handling in Perl

Guys, I'm doing signal handling in Perl. I'm trying to catch ^C signal inside the script. There two scripts : one shell script and one perl script. The shell script calls the perl script. For e.g. shell script a.sh and perl scipt sig.pl. Shell script a.sh looks something like this :... (6 Replies)
Discussion started by: obelix
6 Replies

8. Programming

Signal Handling

Hi folks I'm trying to write a signal handler (in c on HPUX) that will catch the child process launched by execl when it's finished so that I can check a compliance file. The signal handler appears to catch the child process terminating however when the signal handler completes the parent... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: themezzaman
3 Replies

9. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

signal handling in shell script

Hi can any please tell me is it possible to catch the signal in a shell script like we do in C. if yes please give me some idea or a link. (4 Replies)
Discussion started by: Raom
4 Replies

10. UNIX for Advanced & Expert Users

Handling SIGUSR2 signal

HI, I need to handle SIGUSR2 signal in my application to change the state of the application dynamically. I have implemented the signal handler. However the application is able to catch only one SIGUSR2 signal. The second SIGUSR2 signal causes the application to crash. This is happning only with... (3 Replies)
Discussion started by: diganta
3 Replies
Login or Register to Ask a Question