mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	"P. Benie" <pjb1008@eng.cam.ac.uk>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block
Date: 04 Jun 2003 22:29:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1054762191.14033.72.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0306041050250.14593-100000@home.transmeta.com>

On Mer, 2003-06-04 at 18:57, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> A much better fix might well be to actually not allow over-long tty writes
> at all, and thus avoid the "block out" thing at the source of the problem,
> instead of trying to make programs who play nice be the ones that suffer.
> 
> If somebody does a 1MB write to a tty, do we actually have any reason to 
> try to make it so damn atomic and not return early?

I would be concerned as to what applications rely in the tty write being done
completely before returning. OTOH I can't see any reason we can't drop the
atomicity part without dropping the 1Mb write will eventually write 1Mbyte
property. That would not seem to be a problem unless POSIX says otherwise ?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2003-06-04 22:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 53+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-06-04  0:58 P. Benie
2003-06-04  5:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-06-04 14:35   ` Linus Torvalds
2003-06-04 14:58     ` P. Benie
2003-06-04 16:47     ` Alan Cox
2003-06-04 17:57       ` Linus Torvalds
2003-06-04 19:46         ` P. Benie
2003-06-04 19:56           ` Linus Torvalds
2003-06-04 20:48             ` P. Benie
2003-06-11  0:19               ` Robert White
2003-06-04 20:43           ` Hua Zhong
2003-06-04 23:42           ` Russell King
2003-06-04 23:47             ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-04 21:29         ` Alan Cox [this message]
2003-06-04 17:14     ` Hua Zhong
2003-06-04 17:41       ` Linus Torvalds
2003-06-04 18:44         ` Hua Zhong
2003-06-04 18:47           ` P. Benie
2003-06-04 19:23             ` P. Benie
2003-06-04 19:20           ` Linus Torvalds
2003-06-04 17:53       ` Mike Dresser
2003-06-04 15:21   ` Coding standards. (Was: Re: [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block) Timothy Miller
2003-06-07  0:12     ` Greg KH
2003-06-07  0:59       ` Alex Goddard
2003-06-09 16:24       ` Timothy Miller
2003-06-09 16:39         ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-09 17:15           ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-09 17:33             ` Eli Carter
2003-06-09 17:49               ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-06-09 18:07                 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-09 18:22                   ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-09 18:55             ` Timothy Miller
2003-06-09 18:58               ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-09 21:35                 ` David Schwartz
2003-06-09 22:55                   ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-09 23:21                     ` Nigel Cunningham
2003-06-09 21:54                 ` Jörn Engel
2003-06-10 18:17                 ` Jesse Pollard
2003-06-10 18:41                   ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-10 18:14               ` Jesse Pollard
2003-06-09 23:50             ` James Stevenson
2003-06-09 18:44           ` Timothy Miller
2003-06-09 22:00             ` Jörn Engel
     [not found] <20030604172026$296c@gated-at.bofh.it>
     [not found] ` <20030604175013$3a4d@gated-at.bofh.it>
2003-06-04 19:13   ` [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block Ben Pfaff
2003-06-04 19:36 Hua Zhong
2003-06-04 20:09 ` Hua Zhong
2003-06-05  0:04 Ed Vance
2003-06-05  0:19 ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-05 18:34   ` Mike Fedyk
2003-06-05 19:15     ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-06-05 21:46       ` Joe Korty
2003-06-06  0:13     ` Davide Libenzi
2003-06-06 12:13 Nicholas Berry

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1054762191.14033.72.camel@dhcp22.swansea.linux.org.uk \
    --to=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pjb1008@eng.cam.ac.uk \
    --cc=torvalds@transmeta.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®