From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1O9Eci-0004qy-Gq
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 May 2010 05:41:04 -0400
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=50159 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O9Ecf-0004qA-9U
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 May 2010 05:41:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <amit.shah@redhat.com>) id 1O9D2u-00007n-8n
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 May 2010 04:00:15 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4242)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <amit.shah@redhat.com>) id 1O9D2l-00006R-HF
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 04 May 2010 03:59:55 -0400
Date: Tue, 4 May 2010 13:28:00 +0530
From: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <20100504075800.GB8136@amit-x200.redhat.com>
References: <1272957442-7832-1-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com>
	<1272957442-7832-2-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com>
	<1272957442-7832-3-git-send-email-amit.shah@redhat.com>
	<4BDFCEE3.8070601@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <4BDFCEE3.8070601@redhat.com>
Subject: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH v4 2/5] char: Add qemu_chr_write_nb() for
	nonblocking writes
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Gerd Hoffmann <kraxel@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>, qemu list <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>, Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>

On (Tue) May 04 2010 [09:38:11], Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>   Hi,
>
>> -static int unix_write(int fd, const uint8_t *buf, int len1)
>> +static int unix_write(int fd, const uint8_t *buf, int len1, bool nonblock)
>>   {
>>       int ret, len;
>>
>> @@ -522,6 +537,9 @@ static int unix_write(int fd, const uint8_t *buf, int len1)
>>       while (len>  0) {
>>           ret = write(fd, buf, len);
>>           if (ret<  0) {
>> +            if (errno == EAGAIN&&  nonblock) {
>> +                return -EAGAIN;
>> +            }
>
> You've just re-introduced the bug you've fixed in patch 1/5 ...

Uh!

		Amit