On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> I have following proposals:
>
> * make recv(..., MSG_DONTWAIT) work on any fd
>
> Sounds neat, but not trivial to implement in current kernel.
This is mildly ugly, if you ask me. Those are socket functions, and the
flags parameter contain some pretty
On Monday 01 October 2007 20:04, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> > They don't even need to read in parallel, just having shared fd is enough.
> > Think about pipes, sockets and terminals. A real-world scenario:
> >
> > * a process started from shell (interactive or shell script)
> > * it sets O_NONBLOCK a
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> On Monday 01 October 2007 19:16, Al Viro wrote:
> > * it's on a bunch of cyclic lists. Have its neighbor
> > go away while you are doing all that crap => boom
> > * there's that thing call current position... It gets buggered.
> > * overwri
Al Viro wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 11:07:15AM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>> Also attached is ndelaytest.c which can be used to test that
>> send(MSG_DONTWAIT) indeed is failing with EAGAIN if write would block
>> and that other processes never see O_NONBLOCK set.
>>
>> Comments?
>
> Never
On Monday 01 October 2007 19:16, Al Viro wrote:
> * it's on a bunch of cyclic lists. Have its neighbor
> go away while you are doing all that crap => boom
> * there's that thing call current position... It gets buggered.
> * overwriting it while another task might be in the midd
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 11:07:15AM +0100, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> Also attached is ndelaytest.c which can be used to test that
> send(MSG_DONTWAIT) indeed is failing with EAGAIN if write would block
> and that other processes never see O_NONBLOCK set.
>
> Comments?
Never send patches during or ap
On Monday 01 October 2007 04:15, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
> > My use case is: I want to do a nonblocking read on descriptor 0 (stdin).
> > It may be a pipe or a socket.
> >
> > There may be other processes which share this descriptor with me,
> > I simpl
On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> My use case is: I want to do a nonblocking read on descriptor 0 (stdin).
> It may be a pipe or a socket.
>
> There may be other processes which share this descriptor with me,
> I simply cannot know that. And they, too, may want to do reads on it.
>
> I
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Denys Vlasenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi Ulrich,
>
>On Friday 28 September 2007 18:34, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
>> One more small change to extend the availability of creation of
>> file descriptors with FD_CLOEXEC set. Adding a new command to
>> fcntl() requires
On Monday 01 October 2007 00:11, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Sep 2007, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
>
> > Hi Ulrich,
> >
> > On Friday 28 September 2007 18:34, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> > > One more small change to extend the availability of creation of
> > > file descriptors with FD_CLOEXEC set.
On Sun, 30 Sep 2007, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> Hi Ulrich,
>
> On Friday 28 September 2007 18:34, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> > One more small change to extend the availability of creation of
> > file descriptors with FD_CLOEXEC set. Adding a new command to
> > fcntl() requires no new system call and t
Hi Ulrich,
On Friday 28 September 2007 18:34, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> One more small change to extend the availability of creation of
> file descriptors with FD_CLOEXEC set. Adding a new command to
> fcntl() requires no new system call and the overall impact on
> code size if minimal.
Tangential
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Davide Libenzi wrote:
> I think new system calls would have been a cleaner way to accomplish this.
> The "small pill at a time" may have better chance to go in, but will
> likely result in an uglier userspace interface.
We'd need this call anyway si
On Fri, 28 Sep 2007, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> One more small change to extend the availability of creation of
> file descriptors with FD_CLOEXEC set. Adding a new command to
> fcntl() requires no new system call and the overall impact on
> code size if minimal.
>
> If this patch gets accepted we
14 matches
Mail list logo
