X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<44A3F2CF.3040503@netbauds.net>
Date:	Thu, 29 Jun 2006 16:33:35 +0100
From:	Darryl Miles <darryl-mailinglists AT netbauds DOT net>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-GB; rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060614 SeaMonkey/1.0.2
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Proposal: select(2) writability notifcation vs write operations on pipes
References:	<44A348D1 DOT 6070908 AT netbauds DOT net> <44A3F101 DOT 2070400 AT netbauds DOT net>
In-Reply-To:	<44A3F101.2070400@netbauds.net>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

Darryl Miles wrote:
> * That all writing to WIN32 NamedPipes is done non-blocking version of 
> WriteFileEx() call.  If the response back from the WIN32 kernel is that 
> it can't take the data yet (would have blocked) then the following plan 
> jumps into action:

Opps, I should have added that the plan jumps into action only if the 
POSIX side (we are emulating) has the fd set in blocking mode.  If its 
in non-blocking mode we would return -1 EAGAIN from the write() call.

Darryl

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -