Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Ulrich Drepper
Date: Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - 9:04 am

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

David Miller wrote:

Well, the alternative is to introduce a dozens of new interfaces.  It
was Linus who suggested this alternative.  Plus, it seems that for
syslets we need basically the same interface anyway.



Eric had no arguments and HP's comments lack a viable alternative proposal.



Defined in <linux/indirect.h>:

+#define INDIRECT_PARAM(set, name) current->indirect_params.set.name

Not my idea, I was following one review comment.

- --
➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHQwWl2ijCOnn/RHQRAhEbAJ9/bkrb/phOMRl16Fb0N1TDYglSsgCeNhHQ
3huhdKCAVTu4CJnktf/ufy4=
=Jj6h
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new sockets, Ulrich Drepper, (Mon Nov 19, 11:53 pm)
Re: [PATCHv4 5/6] Allow setting O_NONBLOCK flag for new so ..., Ulrich Drepper, (Tue Nov 20, 9:04 am)