![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
2007/5/6, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>: > On Sun, 6 May 2007, Alan Cox wrote:>> > > However, whatever policy the buffer uses, the fundamental point it's that > > > when I flush the input buffer I should be sure that each byte read > > > after the flush is *new* (current) data and not old one. This because> >> > Define "new" and "old" in this case. I don't believe you can give a > > precise definition or that such a thing is physically possible.>> One can come close. It would make sense to say that after a flush, > subsequent reads should retrieve _contiguous_ bytes from the input stream. > In other words, rule out the possibility that the read would get bytes > 1-10 (from some buffer somewhere) followed by bytes 30-60 (because bytes > 11-29 were dropped by the flush). By contrast, it would be permissible > for the read to obtain bytes 20-60, even though 20-29 may have been > entered the input stream before the flush occurred. > You've expressed in an extremely clear way what I meant. Thanks. Regards, ~ Antonio - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2007-05-07 08:09 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||