[2.5] Non-blocking write can block
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
"Richard B. Johnson" <[email protected]> 06/05/03 03:15PM
On Thu, 5 Jun 2003, Mike Fedyk wrote:
Quoted 1 line · Davide Libenzi
Besides the stupid name
O_REALLYNONBLOCK, it really should be
different
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
from both
O_NONBLOCKandO_NDELAY. Currently in Linux they both map
to the
Quoted 1 line
Quoted 1 line
same value, so you really need a new value to not break binary
compatibility.
Quoted 2 lines
Hmm, wouldn't that be source and binary compatability? If an app
used
Quoted 1 line
O_NDELAYandO_NONBLOCKinterchangably, then a change toO_NDELAY
would
Quoted 3 lines
break source compatability too.
Also, what do other UNIX OSes do? Do they have seperate semantics
for
Quoted 1 line
O_NONBLOCKandO_NDELAY? If so, then it would probably be better to
change
Quoted 1 line
O_NDELAYto be similar and add another feature at the same time as
reducing
Quoted 4 lines
platform specific codeing in userspace.
-My Sun thinks that
O_NDELAY=0x04andO_NONBLOCK=0x80, FWIW.
AIX 4.3.3 O_NDELAY = 0x8000 and O_NONBLOCK = 0x04 FWTW.
Nik
Quoted 4 lines
Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin : Linux version 2.4.20 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips). Why is the government concerned about the lunatic fringe? Think about
it.