Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > Are we trying to protect ourselves against somebody _else_ giving us a > non-blocking descriptor? In that case we'll quietly spin and waste CPU. > Which isn't great, but perhaps better than returning an error. I think I said it earlier in a message upthread. > Ahh, there is a difference if the file descriptor the caller feeds > strbuf_read_once() happens to be marked as nonblock. read_once() > wants to return without doing the poll() in such a case. Even > though this series would not introduce any use of a nonblocking file > descriptor, as a general API function, [4/8] must be prepared for > such a future caller, hence [3/8] is needed. -- 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