On Mon 14-11-11 20:15:56, Wu Fengguang wrote: > > @@ -2407,6 +2407,10 @@ static ssize_t generic_perform_write(struct file *file, > > iov_iter_count(i)); > > > > again: > > + if (signal_pending(current)) { > > signal_pending looks more useful than fatal_signal_pending in that it > covers normal signals too. However it's exactly the broader coverage > that makes it an interface change -- will this possibly break casually > written applications? Yeah, this is upto discussion. Historically, write() (or any other system call) could have returned EINTR. In fact, write() to a socket can return EINTR even now. But you are right that we didn't return EINTR from write() to a regular file. So if you prefer to never return EINTR from a write to a regular file, I can change the check since I'm also slightly worried that some badly written app can notice. Honza > > > + status = -EINTR; > > + break; > > + } -- Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx> SUSE Labs, CR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html