On 3/18/06, Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> wrote:4. Applications written for an OS which respects the spec (and using this particular rule) will finally work on Linux.Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Sat, 2006-03-18 at 12:07 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:In the same way as earlier kernels did!
From my reading, 2.4's sys_setitimer() will normalise the incoming timevalHmm. How do you treat a negative value ?
rather than rejecting it. And I think 2.6.13 did that too.
It would be bad of us to change this behaviour, even if that's what the
spec says we should do - because we can break existing applications.
So I think we're stuck with it - we should normalise and then accept such
timevals. And we should have a big comment explaining how we differ from
the spec, and why.
Unless, of course, those kernels did something utterly insane. In that
case we'd need to have a little think.
If the change only affects buggy apps (as Thomas says), then it seems
completely obvious to me that the change should be made.
1. We'll be in compliance with the spec
2. Buggy applications will actually be helped by this by getting a
clear error instead of undefined behaviour silently hiding the fact
that they are buggy.
3. Correct applications are unaffected.