On Fri, May 16, 2025 at 12:48:56PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > > Now, POSIX.1-2024 says: > > > > If close() is interrupted by a signal that is to be caught, then > > it is unspecified whether it returns -1 with errno set to > > [EINTR] and fildes remaining open, or returns -1 with errno set > > to [EINPROGRESS] and fildes being closed, or returns 0 to > > indicate successful completion; [...] > > > > <https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9799919799/functions/close.html> > > > > Which seems to bless HP-UX and screw all the others, requiring them to > > report EINPROGRESS. > > > > Was there any discussion about what to do in the Linux kernel? > > I'm not aware of any discussions but indeed we are returning EINTR while > closing the fd. Frankly, changing the error code we return in that case is > really asking for userspace regressions so I'm of the opinion we just > ignore the standard as in my opinion it goes against a long established > reality. Yeah, it appears that the Austin Group has lost all connection with reality, and we should treat POSIX 2024 accordingly. Not breaking userspace applications is way more important that POSIX 2024 compliance. Which is sad, because I used to really care about POSIX.1 standard as being very useful. But that seems to be no longer the case... - Ted
