Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 03 Nov 2000 14:29:14 -0500 | From | george@moberg ... | Subject | Can EINTR be handled the way BSD handles it? -- a plea from a user-land programmer... |
| |
Considering that the threading library for Linux uses signals to make it work, would it be possible to change the Linux kernel to operate the way BSD does--instead of returning EINTR, just restart the interrupted primitive?
For example, if I'm using read(2) to read data from a file descriptor, and a signal happens, the signal handler runs, and read(2) returns EINTR after the system call finishes. Then I'm supposed to catch this and re-try the system call.
I assume that this is true for _any_ system call which makes the process block, right?
Can we _PLEASE_PLEASE_PLEASE_ not do this anymore and have the kernel do what BSD does: re-start the interrupted call?
Please? If this is something that would be acceptable for integration into a mainline kernel, I would do my best to help with a patch.
If I'm wrong about this, please enlighten me. Also, please cc: me off the list, as I don't get the list directly.
Thank you for your consideration. -- George T. Talbot <george at moberg dot com> - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |