[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080917143042.GA376@tv-sign.ru>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 18:30:42 +0400
From: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>
Cc: Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...glemail.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Davide Libenzi <davidel@...ilserver.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...hat.com>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Subject: Re: sys_paccept: disable paccept() until API design is resolved
On 09/16, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
>
> Michael Kerrisk wrote:
>
> > * The behavior of paccept() when interrupted by a signal is IMO
> > strange:
>
> You use your own opinion as the deciding factor?
It would be very strange if Michael used the somebody else's opinion ;)
> The behavior differs
> from other uses but is consistent with the accept() behavior.
And Michael asks why this behaviour (and paccept() itself) is useful.
I must admit I don't understand this too.
It is very possible that we both just need the help from expert (you).
(Ulrich, there is no irony, seriously).
Oleg.
--
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