From: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
Cc: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@systemhalted.org>,
Kyle McMartin <kyle@infradead.org>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Fritsch <sf@sfritsch.de>,
debian-hppa@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: flock, FAGAIN, and FWOULDBLOCK
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:49:24 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49A2E1A4.8010607@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090223030315.GC16891@parisc-linux.org>
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 09:43:36PM -0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>> ...
>>> but somehow I suspect this interchangeable use of EAGAIN and EWOULDBLOCK
>>> is going to reveal latent problems in this part of the kernel I would
>>> rather not delve into...
>> The ABI is fixed, so all we can do is cleanup the uses in the kernel,
>> and make sure we adhere to the documented APIs.
>
> We actually can do better than this ...
>
> #ifdef __KERNEL__
> #define EWOULDBLOCK EAGAIN
> #else
> #define EWOULDBLOCK /* whatever the fuck HPUX uses */
> #endif
Wouldn't this hurt us if we at some point in time want to finish
the HPUX/Linux compat code in the parisc kernel?
Helge
> Now our kernel never returns -EWOULDBLOCK, only -EAGAIN. Correct
> applications must check for both. Incorrect applications tend to only
> check for AGAIN, not WOULDBLOCK. Problem solved.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-23 17:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <200902222252.45051.sf@sfritsch.de>
[not found] ` <20090222224924.GA13157@bombadil.infradead.org>
2009-02-23 1:42 ` flock, FAGAIN, and FWOULDBLOCK Kyle McMartin
2009-02-23 2:43 ` Carlos O'Donell
2009-02-23 2:43 ` Carlos O'Donell
2009-02-23 2:54 ` Kyle McMartin
2009-02-23 3:00 ` Carlos O'Donell
2009-02-23 3:03 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-02-23 3:55 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-02-23 17:49 ` Helge Deller [this message]
2009-02-23 19:31 ` flock, EAGAIN, and EWOULDBLOCK Stefan Fritsch
2009-02-23 19:31 ` Stefan Fritsch
2009-02-23 3:31 ` flock, FAGAIN, and FWOULDBLOCK Michael Kerrisk
2009-02-23 3:20 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-02-23 3:50 ` Kyle McMartin
2009-02-23 4:01 ` Michael Kerrisk
2009-02-23 8:23 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=49A2E1A4.8010607@gmx.de \
--to=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=carlos@systemhalted.org \
--cc=debian-hppa@lists.debian.org \
--cc=kyle@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=sf@sfritsch.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox