From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: Clean up sha1 file writing Date: Sun, 4 Jun 2006 11:40:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <44808710.1080000@zytor.com> <4483259A.7090806@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Matthias Lederhofer , Git Mailing List X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jun 04 20:41:36 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FmxX7-0000lo-3L for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 04 Jun 2006 20:41:07 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750935AbWFDSk6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:40:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750951AbWFDSk6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:40:58 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:699 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750902AbWFDSk6 (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 14:40:58 -0400 Received: from shell0.pdx.osdl.net (fw.osdl.org [65.172.181.6]) by smtp.osdl.org (8.12.8/8.12.8) with ESMTP id k54Iet2g004070 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Sun, 4 Jun 2006 11:40:55 -0700 Received: from localhost (shell0.pdx.osdl.net [10.9.0.31]) by shell0.pdx.osdl.net (8.13.1/8.11.6) with ESMTP id k54IesOt021547; Sun, 4 Jun 2006 11:40:54 -0700 To: "H. Peter Anvin" In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 required=5 tests= X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63-osdl_revision__1.75__ X-MIMEDefang-Filter: osdl$Revision: 1.135 $ X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.36 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Sun, 4 Jun 2006, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > > > Or if you're getting a SIGWINCH in the middle of it. > > > > Any POSIX system will interrupt the transfer and return a short read on > > receiving a signal. > > Only for interruptible fd's, though, which normally a real "file" won't > be. And _usually_ only if you actually have a SIGWINCH handler. Although older Linux kernels were broken in this regard. They'd interrupt a socket/pipe read or write even for a signal that ended up being ignored. So it's absolutely the case that having the loop is always the safer thing to do, and it's never the _wrong_ thing to do. Linus