On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Em Tue, May 27, 2014 at 06:35:17PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) escreveu: >> On 05/26/2014 11:17 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: >> > Can you try the attached patch on top of the first one? > >> Patches on patches is a way to make your testers work unnecessarily >> harder. Also, it means that anyone else who was interested in this > > It was meant to highlight the changes with regard to the previous patch, > i.e. to make things easier for reviewing. (I don't think that works...) >> thread likely got lost at this point, because they probably didn't >> save the first patch. All of this to say: it makes life much easier >> if you provide a complete new self-contained patch on each iteration. > > If you prefer it that way, find one attached, that I was about to send > (but you can wait till I use your program to test it ;-) ) > >> > It starts adding explicit parentheses on a ternary, as David requested, >> > and then should return the remaining timeouts in cases like signals, >> > etc. >> > >> > Please let me know if this is enough. >> >> Nope, it doesn't fix the problem. (I applied both patches against 3.15-rc7) > > What was the problem experienced? The problem is that after EINTR, the timeout is not updated with the remaining time until expiry. (This was true with just patch 1 applied, and is also true with both patch 1 and patch 2 applied.) Cheers, Michael -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
