Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263315AbTFDOWi (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:22:38 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263319AbTFDOWi (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:22:38 -0400 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:34317 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263315AbTFDOWg (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2003 10:22:36 -0400 Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 07:35:47 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds To: Christoph Hellwig cc: "P. Benie" , Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block In-Reply-To: <20030604065336.A7755@infradead.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 972 Lines: 27 On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > The else should be on the same line as the closing brace, else > the patch looks fine. No no no, it's wrong. If you do something like this, then you also have to teach "select()" about this, otherwise you just get busy looping in applications. In general, we shouldn't do this, unless somebody can show an application where it really matters. Taking internal kernel locking into account for "blockingness" easily gets quite complicated, and there is seldom any real point to it. Remember: perfect is the enemy of good. I'll happily apply the patch (if it also updates the tty poll() functionality), _if_ there is some real-world situation where it matters. Linus - 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/