Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2018 11:45:16 +0100 From: Julien Ramseier <j.ramseier@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] sigtimedwait: allow failing with EINTR > Le 23 févr. 2018 à 22:45, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> a écrit : > > On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 01:09:35PM +0100, Julien Ramseier wrote: >> According to POSIX, sigtimedwait(2) is allowed to fail >> with EINTR, while sigwait(3) is not, so move the retry loop there. >> --- > > This is a "may fail", not a "shall fail". Generally we prefer not to > support EINTR in cases where it's optional, since getting rid of them > with retry loops makes it safe to run on old kernels or > pseudo-linux-compat systems where SA_RESTART semantics were/are not > actually conforming. Is there a reason you want it to fail with EINTR? > > Rich Some apps seem to rely on this, notably Python where a test case expects sigtimedwait to be interrupted when a SIGALRM is fired. I cannot find another case in musl where EINTR is inhibited (while being allowed by POSIX), are there any? - Julien
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.