From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-patches-return-437996-listarch-gcc-patches=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 35719 invoked by alias); 7 Oct 2016 19:26:53 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-patches.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 35690 invoked by uid 89); 7 Oct 2016 19:26:52 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=seriously, blomqvistjannegmailcom, blomqvist.janne@gmail.com, existed
X-HELO: resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net
Received: from resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net (HELO resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net) (96.114.154.164) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 19:26:51 +0000
Received: from resomta-po-08v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.232])	by resqmta-po-05v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP	id sammbZCFxcEL1sanCbCJwr; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 19:26:50 +0000
Received: from up.mrs.kithrup.com ([24.4.193.248])	by resomta-po-08v.sys.comcast.net with SMTP	id sanAbveQSm6rKsanBbwMlS; Fri, 07 Oct 2016 19:26:50 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Subject: Re: [PATCH, libgfortran] PR 67585 Handle EINTR
From: Mike Stump <mikestump@comcast.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAO9iq9FKUvfRDqpCSLCC0nwA5UcpFX7ocP9NVmMu+YVJx=NHbg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2016 19:26:00 -0000
Cc: FX <fxcoudert@gmail.com>, Fortran List <fortran@gcc.gnu.org>, GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <95045C89-3CCF-4FDE-AA41-344D0C1F8596@comcast.net>
References: <1475843186-3429-1-git-send-email-blomqvist.janne@gmail.com> <F04C59DD-1F6D-4E26-AC2E-A1981551A555@gmail.com> <CAO9iq9FKUvfRDqpCSLCC0nwA5UcpFX7ocP9NVmMu+YVJx=NHbg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Janne Blomqvist <blomqvist.janne@gmail.com>
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfGHtlFP1DhCG7LOdB+8TPOW7jYpjZ1i2mpoSnPB5UiA+n+NSjycLHIMG0OcE2kMlrmGCA5y5up2TJzGyY51k2TOnmMs+fiNyC/tV03ltkYJcd+oe3rrS M/bTOuOyhAvF012t+q5U1fQ5t3W0kizEWxvPbHAaNiCjNZYW4wNMtHVxo5M537NewlS5WKyce3cyn7zoKZj5NasI/SJNV9idDdnpHPiPGtKtf4I22a6csKmv bCQNroCOZTItawUX6fURWG2r/gmCTp2R11VnBDPtfD/1D4tIdlozYenz6gJp/ppq
X-IsSubscribed: yes
X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00515.txt.bz2

On Oct 7, 2016, at 5:59 AM, Janne Blomqvist <blomqvist.janne@gmail.com> wro=
te:
>=20
> So I suppose in theory you could have a situation where something
> continuously fires signals at the process, and the result is some kind
> of race between the process restarting the syscall which then never
> manages to complete before being interrupted again. But I think this
> goes into the "Doctor, this hurts! Then don't do that" territory.

No, this is in the territory of seriously broken software that I don't thin=
k has ever existed.