Re: More questions...

[Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>]

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/