Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 4 Jun 2002 19:47:10 -0400
From:      Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu>
To:        Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>, Alexander Leidinger <netchild@FreeBSD.ORG>
Cc:        audit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] making dump EINTR resistant
Message-ID:  <p05111726b923006f0c07@[128.113.24.47]>
In-Reply-To: <20020605083335.T5376-100000@gamplex.bde.org>
References:  <20020605083335.T5376-100000@gamplex.bde.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 8:43 AM +1000 6/5/02, Bruce Evans wrote:
>On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Alexander Leidinger wrote:
>>
>  > The attached diff is against -current.
>>
>>  Comments?
>
>read(), etc., are supposed to be restarted after signals, so
>the EINTR checks should have no effect in most cases.
>

Would it be acceptable to add EINTR-type checks to freebsd-ish
code?  There are some sections of lpr/lpd which do not work
right when compiled on other platforms, unless I add EINTR
checks at the right places.

Admittedly I haven't gone thru and figured out everyplace that
should have those checks, I've just added them when I run into
some system call which seems to get interrupted a lot.  The
present lpr code already includes *some* checks for EINTR, but
I add a few more (when I compile lpr on other platforms...).
Would it be reasonable to add those to the regular freebsd
source for lpr?

-- 
Garance Alistair Drosehn            =   gad@gilead.netel.rpi.edu
Senior Systems Programmer           or  gad@freebsd.org
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    or  drosih@rpi.edu

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?p05111726b923006f0c07>