Re: [Gnu-arch-users] [BUG] serious bug in vu_write_retry?

[Aaron Bentley]

Tom Lord wrote:
>     > From: Aaron Bentley <address@hidden>
>
>     > I'm not so sure about the interface itself.  Shouldn't it return
>     > a short count if it partially succeeds?

> There is no portably correct
> and interestingly useful short count to return for other errors.

So, when vu_write returns -1, it may have written something?

> Allowing the _retry functions to 
> return a partial count would make them the same, for nearly all
> practical purposes as plain old read/write: there'd be no point to
> having the _retry functions at all.)

There'd be the distinction that when vu_write doesn't complete, you may 
want to retry, but when vu_write_retry doesn't complete, it's pointless.

It's just a return value thing, and doesn't change what the functions 
do.  You'll get get same behaviour from both if you do:
if (vu_write_retry(count) != count)
    panic("write could not be completed")

But whatever.  I doubt it makes much difference, as you say, given the 
intended use of the function.

Aaron

--
Aaron Bentley
Director of Technology
Panometrics, Inc.