[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87imthclyt.fsf@xmission.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Jun 2019 13:02:50 -0500
From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@...ck.org>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
David Laight <David.Laight@...lab.com>,
Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>,
Eric Wong <e@...24.org>, linux-aio@...ck.org,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] aio: simplify the usage of restore_saved_sigmask_unless()
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> writes:
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 10:33 AM Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>
>> Are they actually nonrestartable? I think the current EINTR is just a mistake.
>
> Oh, I guess they are, because of the relative timeout thing that
> shouldn't reset to the original value.
>
> And I don't think this is worth a ERESTAR_RESTARTTBLOCK.
Unless I am misreading things io_pgetevents isn't restartable
either and ERESTARTNOHAND is a bug in that case.
Is the bug going the other way?
Eric
Powered by blists - more mailing lists