Hello Ian, On 11/01/2018 07:44 PM, Ian Turner wrote: > The exact return calls are at the discretion of the underlying VFS, > but I'm pretty sure that EINTR is a possibility. Or, if it's not, then > the flock() manpage should be amended accordingly, since the two share > the same underlying implementation. Yes, EINTR should be added. I've applied your patch. (Note, though, that lockf(3) is implemented on top of fcntl(2) locking rather than flock(2) locking.) Cheers, Michael > index 80ce61f65..f83ae3b05 100644 > --- a/man3/lockf.3 > +++ b/man3/lockf.3 > @@ -147,6 +147,11 @@ The command was > .B F_LOCK > and this lock operation would cause a deadlock. > .TP > +.B EINTR > +While waiting to acquire a lock, the call was interrupted by > +delivery of a signal caught by a handler; see > +.BR signal (7). > +.TP > .B EINVAL > An invalid operation was specified in > .IR cmd . > -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/
