On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 12:33:38AM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote: > To be bug-compatible with glibc, you'd need to return the wrong > [EDEADLK] error for robust errorcheck mutexes only. Robust > non-errorcheck and non-robust errorcheck mutexes return the correct > [EBUSY]. I have not checked PI and PP mutexes which probably use a > different code path. Yes, you are right, I read the glibc code wrong way.
> I'm not sure whether we should copy glibc's bug, but if we do it must be > documented in the man page. I'm not happy with it because the bug may > break applications written to the standard; at least, Samba developers > should be contacted first. I tried to send the mail to samba tech list yesterday, but it did not pass. Seems that today I managed it. Still, it is pity that the only real-world consumer of the robust interface cannot exercise our implementation due to this minor issue. _______________________________________________ svn-src-all@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-all-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
