[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations
From: |
Richard Braun |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations |
Date: |
Thu, 24 Jan 2013 13:48:37 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 09:15:06PM +0100, Pino Toscano wrote:
> Actually, from my reading the poll documentation (unlike the select one)
> does not say what to do when nfds=0; on Linux, the timeout seems ignored
> and 0 is returned right away, with no delay.
On my system (Debian squeeze), poll and select behave the same when nfds
is 0, i.e. the timeout is not ignored and the call acts as a sleep.
IMHO, our implementation should stick to that common behaviour.
--
Richard Braun
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations, (continued)
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations, Svante Signell, 2013/01/23
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations (version 3), Svante Signell, 2013/01/24
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations (version 3), Richard Braun, 2013/01/24
- Re: [PATCH,HURD][RFC] hurdselect: Step2, code split finished, Svante Signell, 2013/01/24
Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations, Pino Toscano, 2013/01/22
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations, Svante Signell, 2013/01/22
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations, Samuel Thibault, 2013/01/22
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations, Svante Signell, 2013/01/22
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations, Richard Braun, 2013/01/22
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations, Pino Toscano, 2013/01/22
- Re: [PATCH,HURD] hurdselect: Step1, code split preparations,
Richard Braun <=