lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Re: Strange Linux behaviour with blocking syscalls and stop signals+SIGCONT
Von: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>

> sem_wait() is another case. Here the EINTR handling is exposed to the
> programmer. Currently, as I understand it, even SA_RESTART handlers
> cause EINTR to be returned.

Yes, this is true for sem_wait().

> Yes, this usually correct but it might
> disrupt existing code.
>
> This is why I'd caution anybody who thinks about changing something in
> this area. *I* could live with it, I can fix and recompile all the code
> I use. But others aren't that lucky.

Yes; this is why I'm only proposing to change EINTR to ERESTARTNOHAND
at the moment. The only userspace visible change that I think
this will bring about is in the stop+SIGCONT case. Changing EINTR
to ERESTARTSYS is likely to have more impact on userland (though
it still strikes me as a desirable gola to have all system calls
restartable via SA_RESTART).

Cheers,

Michael
--


"Feel free" – 10 GB Mailbox, 100 FreeSMS/Monat ...
Jetzt GMX TopMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/topmail
-
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: 2006-07-07 07:11    [W:0.844 / U:0.168 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site