Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264788AbTFESUh (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jun 2003 14:20:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264803AbTFESUh (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jun 2003 14:20:37 -0400 Received: from adsl-63-194-239-202.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net ([63.194.239.202]:26125 "EHLO mmp-linux.matchmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264788AbTFESUg (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jun 2003 14:20:36 -0400 Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 11:34:08 -0700 From: Mike Fedyk To: Davide Libenzi Cc: Ed Vance , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block Message-ID: <20030605183408.GB3291@matchmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: Davide Libenzi , Ed Vance , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <11E89240C407D311958800A0C9ACF7D1A33EBD@EXCHANGE> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 979 Lines: 18 On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 05:19:05PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote: > 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. Hmm, wouldn't that be source and binary compatability? If an app used O_NDELAY and O_NONBLOCK interchangably, then a change to O_NDELAY would break source compatability too. Also, what do other UNIX OSes do? Do they have seperate semantics for O_NONBLOCK and O_NDELAY? If so, then it would probably be better to change O_NDELAY to be similar and add another feature at the same time as reducing platform specific codeing in userspace. - 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/