RE: [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block

From: Davide Libenzi (
Date: Wed Jun 04 2003 - 19:19:05 EST

On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Ed Vance wrote:

> Do you mean something like the separate O_NDELAY flag under Solar*s? IIRC
> they also use return code EWOULDBLOCK to differentiate the "could not get
> resource" cases from the "no room for more data" cases when O_NONBLOCK is
> used.

Besides the stupid name O_REALLYNONBLOCK, it really should be different
from both O_NONBLOCK and O_NDELAY. Currently in Linux they both map to the
same value, so you really need a new value to not break binary compatibility.

- Davide

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jun 07 2003 - 22:00:25 EST