On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 4:03 PM Scott Cheloha <scottchel...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If futimens(2) fails here then close(2) is not called and we leak the > descriptor. > Good catch. I think futimens(2) and close(2) failures are exotic enough to warrant > printing the system call name. > I don't understand this. Can you give an example of an error message that touch currently might emit where knowing that the failed call was futimens() or close() would affect the analysis of how to deal with it? I mean, it looks like the only errors that futimens() could really return are EROFS, EIO, and EPERM (implies a race by different users to create the file), and close() could only return EIO. For any of those errors, you're going to handle them the same whether they're from open, futimens, or close, no? Philip Guenther
