On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 9:44 AM, Junio C Hamano <gits...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: >> >> So I think we would probably want to treat EAGAIN specially: return -1 >> to signal to the caller but _don't_ truncate the strbuf. > > Yeah, "don't truncate" is needed. > >> Arguably we should actually return the number of bytes we _did_ read, >> but then caller cannot easily tell the difference between EOF and >> EAGAIN. > > Why can't it check errno==EAGAIN/EWOULDBLOCK?
Grepping through Gits sources, there are no occurrences of explicitly setting O_NONBLOCK except for the newly introduced spot in the followup patch in run-command (yes we do poll there). So how would I find out if a fd is blocking or not in the 82 cases of strbuf_read? (Now I naively assume they would all block.) We could also expose the flags in the API. I think IGNORE_EAGAIN might not be the best now, but rather a NO_TRUNCATE flag would do. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
