[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <12492.1190738426@lwn.net>
Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:40:26 -0600
From: corbet@....net (Jonathan Corbet)
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk-manpages@....net>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/4] new timerfd API v2 - new timerfd API
One quick question:
> Like the previous timerfd API implementation, read(2) and poll(2) are supported
> (with the same interface).
Looking at that interface, it appears that a process doing a read() on a
timerfd with no timer set will block for a very long time. It's an
obvious "don't do that" situation, but perhaps we could help an
occasional developer get a clue by returning something like -EINVAL when
the timer has not been set?
jon
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists