This is the mail archive of the cygwin mailing list for the Cygwin project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Clearing O_NONBLOCK from a pipe may lose data

On Feb 24 08:16, Thomas Wolff wrote:
> Lasse Collin had written.
> >... the possibility of EINTR is mentioned for specific commands and F_SETFL isn't among them.
> A subtle and maybe minor but valid objection.
> Am 23.02.2015 um 13:23 schrieb Corinna Vinschen:
> >On Feb 23 11:56, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >>On Feb 22 22:07, Lasse Collin wrote:
> >>>Alternative idea: Would there be a significant downside if Cygwin
> >>>remembered if non-blocking mode was enabled at some point and close()
> >>>would use that flag instead of the current (non)blocking status to
> >>>determine if the background thread hack should be used?
> >>No, that should be doable with very minor effort.
> >That's still an option, of course.
> I think that sounds like a solution.

I applied a matching patch for this:

Please give it a try.  If you're not set up to build your own Cygwin
DLL, I will generate a new developer snapshot soon, probably today or

Btw., did you have a chance to test the pthread_join change from in the meantime?


Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer                 cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat

Attachment: pgpFq75ivSOlI.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]