[bug #16913] sleep fails to detect overflow on amd64 / linux 2.6

[Paul Eggert]

Update of bug #16913 (project coreutils):

  Status:None => Wont Fix   
 Open/Closed:Open => Closed 

___

Follow-up Comment #1:

xnanosleep's overflow checking merely catches the usual
problems with integer overflow in xnanosleep's own
calculations.  It's not designed to work around bugs in the
implementation of nanosleep.  Offhand, I don't see an easy way
to work around this bug so I'd say you just need to get your
kernel fixed.  (In the meantime you can rest easy knowing that
coreutils "sleep" is a good way to check for the kernel bug.
:-)


___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/



___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils

[bug #16913] sleep fails to detect overflow on amd64 / linux 2.6

[anonymous]

URL:
  

 Summary: sleep fails to detect overflow on amd64 / linux 2.6
 Project: GNU Core Utilities
Submitted by: None
Submitted on: Thursday 06/22/2006 at 14:54 UTC
Category: None
Severity: 3 - Normal
  Item Group: None
  Status: None
 Privacy: Public
 Assigned to: None
 Open/Closed: Open

___

Details:


sleep 100  -> returns immediately with exit code 0
sleep 10   -> sleeps
sleep 1000 -> sleeps

Not really sane amounts of seconds to sleep but on the other hand there is
some code in xnanosleep.c to handle overflow conditions.

More details about the underlying bug in nanosleep() in 

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=374983








___

Reply to this item at:

  

___
  Message sent via/by Savannah
  http://savannah.gnu.org/



___
Bug-coreutils mailing list
Bug-coreutils@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-coreutils