[<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