RE: [PATCH] [2.5] Non-blocking write can block

[Davide Libenzi]

On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Ed Vance wrote:

> Do you mean something like the separate O_NDELAY flag under Solar*s? IIRC
> they also use return code EWOULDBLOCK to differentiate the "could not get
> resource" cases from the "no room for more data" cases when O_NONBLOCK is
> used.

Besides the stupid name O_REALLYNONBLOCK, it really should be different
from both O_NONBLOCK and O_NDELAY. Currently in Linux they both map to the
same value, so you really need a new value to not break binary compatibility.

- Davide