Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264334AbTFEAHu (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2003 20:07:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264336AbTFEAHu (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2003 20:07:50 -0400 Received: from x35.xmailserver.org ([208.129.208.51]:22672 "EHLO x35.xmailserver.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264334AbTFEAHt (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Jun 2003 20:07:49 -0400 X-AuthUser: davidel@xmailserver.org Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2003 17:19:05 -0700 (PDT) From: Davide Libenzi X-X-Sender: davide@bigblue.dev.mcafeelabs.com To: Ed Vance cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: RE: [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block In-Reply-To: <11E89240C407D311958800A0C9ACF7D1A33EBD@EXCHANGE> Message-ID: References: <11E89240C407D311958800A0C9ACF7D1A33EBD@EXCHANGE> 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: 756 Lines: 20 On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Ed Vance wrote: > Do you mean something like the separate O_NDELAY flag under Solar*s? IIRC > they also use return code EWOULDBLOCK to differentiate the "could not get > resource" cases from the "no room for more data" cases when O_NONBLOCK is > used. Besides the stupid name O_REALLYNONBLOCK, it really should be different from both O_NONBLOCK and O_NDELAY. Currently in Linux they both map to the same value, so you really need a new value to not break binary compatibility. - Davide - 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/