On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 9:21 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
[off-list ref] wrote:

Em Tue, May 27, 2014 at 06:35:17PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) escreveu:

quoted

On 05/26/2014 11:17 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:

quoted

Can you try the attached patch on top of the first one?

quoted

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...)

quoted

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 ;-) )

quoted

quoted

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-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html