[lkml]   [2000]   [Nov]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectCan EINTR be handled the way BSD handles it? -- a plea from a user-land programmer...
Considering that the threading library for Linux uses signals to make it
work, would it be possible to change the Linux kernel to operate the way
BSD does--instead of returning EINTR, just restart the interrupted

For example, if I'm using read(2) to read data from a file descriptor,
and a signal happens, the signal handler runs, and read(2) returns EINTR
after the system call finishes. Then I'm supposed to catch this and
re-try the system call.

I assume that this is true for _any_ system call which makes the process
block, right?

Can we _PLEASE_PLEASE_PLEASE_ not do this anymore and have the kernel do
what BSD does: re-start the interrupted call?

Please? If this is something that would be acceptable for integration
into a mainline kernel, I would do my best to help with a patch.

If I'm wrong about this, please enlighten me. Also, please cc: me off
the list, as I don't get the list directly.

Thank you for your consideration.
George T. Talbot
<george at moberg dot com>
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:45    [W:0.084 / U:6.576 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site