[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0802011022430.3839-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 10:27:46 -0500 (EST)
From: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
To: Salvador Eduardo Tropea <salvador@...i.gov.ar>
cc: USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel development list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Should nonblocking I/O calls to a disconnected device get an error?
[was: Problem: hiddev stops sending events after some error recoveries]
On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, Salvador Eduardo Tropea wrote:
> Now, I tried unplugging the device while executing a NONBLOCKing
> program. I didn't get any I/O error. It means I was wrong about the
> difference between unplugging the device and the effect of a recovery
> like the one I mentioned previously. You are right, but IMHO that's odd,
> the device should also inform I/O error when reading using a NONBLOCKing
> file handler. Currently a program must use blocking reads in order to
> get notified about the problem. It looks bad and lacks consistency. What
> do you think?
I don't know. Other people have debated this issue in the past, but I
can't remember what the final decision was or the reasons for it.
Alan Stern
--
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