From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2001 00:15:33 +0200 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: More questions... Message-ID: <20011016001533.A30579@gruyere.muc.suse.de> References: <20011015215654.16878.qmail@web14304.mail.yahoo.com> <3BCB5CF6.5020607@zytor.com> <20011016000836.A28390@gruyere.muc.suse.de> <3BCB5F20.5000609@zytor.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3BCB5F20.5000609@zytor.com>; from hpa@zytor.com on Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 03:11:44PM -0700 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "H. Peter Anvin" Cc: Andi Kleen , Kanoj Sarcar , Linux MM mailing list List-ID: On Mon, Oct 15, 2001 at 03:11:44PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > IWBNI it could be added, assuming it can be done without breaking existing > applications (perhaps a flag could be snuck in somewhere.) I can write > the code so that if the information is present, it uses it; otherwise the > worst that can happen is having to do the two-step NONE -> READ -> > READ|WRITE transition, as it currently is. At least on linux si_errno on signals should be always 0. I doubt anything depends on that. I don't know if that is true on other operating systems however. Single Unix has nothing to say about it as far as I can see. You don't need a flag. Just use it when it is != 0. -Andi -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/