From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [63.128.21.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B1683858D29 for ; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 09:45:06 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 8B1683858D29 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-360-lHAoLnbAPWq207jUh0D6Fg-1; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 04:45:02 -0500 X-MC-Unique: lHAoLnbAPWq207jUh0D6Fg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 824171E561; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 09:45:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (ovpn-113-131.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.131]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94F461992D; Mon, 15 Feb 2021 09:45:00 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Tobias Bading Cc: libc-help@sourceware.org, Godmar Back Subject: Re: (stat(...) == -1 || faccessat(...) == -1) && errno == EINTR ?!?? References: <000830b6-1cf0-6349-5667-a5af6894ac1b@web.de> <87czx1fzun.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <8a591e0e-33bb-7518-5e31-42f0545a940e@web.de> Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 10:45:27 +0100 In-Reply-To: <8a591e0e-33bb-7518-5e31-42f0545a940e@web.de> (Tobias Bading's message of "Mon, 15 Feb 2021 10:43:28 +0100") Message-ID: <878s7pfyvc.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, PLING_QUERY, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-help@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-help mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2021 09:45:08 -0000 * Tobias Bading: >> Returning EINTR in stat would allow relatively straightforward >> implementation of a timeout, in case the path resides on a network file >> system and the server is unreachable.=C2=A0 So it's not a completely >> unreasonable thing to do. > > Good point. > >> On the other hand, the cost in lost backwards >> compatibility with applications that do not know about this behavior >> appears to be pretty high, as this thread shows. > > What's your interpretation of the POSIX standard? Does it permit such a > backwards compatibility breaking change? Yes, this is not a POSIX conformance issue. POSIX also does not make any requirements regarding backwards compatibility or bug-for-bug compatibility. Thanks, Florian --=20 Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn, Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243, Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'N= eill