From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wu Fengguang <fengguang.wu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] fs: Make write(2) interruptible by a signal
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 20:15:56 +0800
Message-ID: <20111114121556.GB4616@localhost>
References: <1321269030-6019-1-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
 <1321269030-6019-3-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Cc: "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>,
	"k-mio@sx.jp.nec.com" <k-mio@sx.jp.nec.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To: Jan Kara <jack@suse.cz>
Return-path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:35348 "EHLO mga03.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751690Ab1KNMQC (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 14 Nov 2011 07:16:02 -0500
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1321269030-6019-3-git-send-email-jack@suse.cz>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

> @@ -2407,6 +2407,10 @@ static ssize_t generic_perform_write(struct file *file,
>  						iov_iter_count(i));
>  
>  again:
> +		if (signal_pending(current)) {

signal_pending looks more useful than fatal_signal_pending in that it
covers normal signals too. However it's exactly the broader coverage
that makes it an interface change -- will this possibly break casually
written applications?

> +			status = -EINTR;
> +			break;
> +		}