Re: slow open() calls and o_nonblock

> Now, I'm a userspace guy so I can be pretty dense, but shouldn't a
> call with a nonblocking flag return EAGAIN if its going to take
> anywhere near 415ms?  

Violation of causality. We don't know it will block for 415ms until 415ms
have elapsed. 

Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: slow open() calls and o_nonblock
  - From: "Aaron Wiebe" <[email protected]>

References:
- slow open() calls and o_nonblock
  - From: "Aaron Wiebe" <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: 2.6.22-rc[23]: blinking capslock led, stuck keys?
Next by Date: Re: [Patch 06/18] fs/logfs/compr.c
Previous by thread: Re: slow open() calls and o_nonblock
Next by thread: Re: slow open() calls and o_nonblock
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]