On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 9:55 PM, Torsten Bögershausen <tboegi@xxxxxx> wrote: > But in any case I suggest to xread() as it is, and not to change the > functionality > behind the back of the users. > > I don't think this patch actually changes behavior as it stands now. I think Junio's suggestion does. Personally, I'd prefer some sort of warning when you use xread and get EAGAIN or EWOULDBLOCK. I'd rather see it somehow warn so that we can find the bug (since we really really shouldn't be calling xread with a blocking socket, especially if we have xread_noblock or similar as in this series. Not sure if we really want to handle that, but I know we don't want to change external behavior of xread... I think that polling is better than the current "spinning" behavior. Regards, Jake -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html