| To: | yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Defect in XSH lio_listio() |
| From: | yyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxx |
| Date: | Tue, 3 Jan 2006 21:38:58 GMT |
| Resent-date: | Thu, 5 Jan 2006 16:14:57 +0000 |
| Resent-from: | Andrew Josey <yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Resent-message-id: | <1060105161457.ZM5140@xxxxxx> |
| Resent-to: | yyyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
Defect report from : Ulrich Drepper , Red Hat, Inc. (Please direct followup comments direct to yyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) @ page 695 line 23069 section lio_listio() objection [ud-lio_listio] Problem: Edition of Specification (Year): 2004 Defect code : 2. Omission Nowhere in the document is it stated what happens if individual I/O requests issued via lio_listio() have aio_sigevent members which specify actions other then SIGEV_NONE. It is clear that the sigevent specified in the lio_listio parameter list is used. A simple test shows that there is a difference in existing implementations. Solaris and AIX both handle the sigevent information for the individual requests. Linux does not and only issues one event when all the work is done. I'm willing to concede that the Solaris/AIX semantics has its benefits and am willing to change my implementation. But the spec should be extended as well. Action: I suggest adding a new paragraph at line 23069: The aio_sigevent member specifies the notification which occurs when the request specified by this element of /list/ is completed. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Change to defect form, Andrew Josey |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Defect in XSH fork(), drepper |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Defect in XSH lio_listio(), Clive D.W. Feather |
| Next by Thread: | Defect in XSH mq_receive/mq_timedreceive, dragan |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [All Lists] |