On 8/31/21 12:36 PM, Victor Stewart wrote: >>> _Not tested_, but something like below should do. will get it >>> done properly later, but even better if we already have a test >>> case. Victor? > > sorry been traveling! i can extract out a simple test today... > >> FWIW, I wrote a simple test case for it, and it seemed to work fine. >> Nothing fancy, just a piped read that would never finish with a linked >> timeout (1s), submit, then submit a ltimeout update that changes it to >> 2s instead. Test runs and update completes first with res == 0 as >> expected, and 2s later the ltimeout completes with -EALREADY (because >> the piped read went async) and the piped read gets canceled. > > ...unless? Extra tests are always appreciated, there is never too many of them :) FWIW, don't see any new related added by Jens (yet?). -- Pavel Begunkov
