This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Fix nice

On Thu, Feb 28, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> 2001-06-04 patch for nice apparently changed nothing at all on linux, since
> sysdeps/unix/nice.c which was patched is overridden in
> sysdeps/unix/sysv/syscalls.list (nice), thus nice still returns 0 on
> success, not the actual new priority.
> Fix below. I have briefly tested that it works as expected on ia32 linux.

I found another problem: according to 1003.1-2001:

Requests for values above or below 2*{NZERO}-1 shall result in the 
nice value being set to the corresponding limit.

In the moment we return "prio + incr" and fail the test. Should we
change this to a "return getpriority (PRIO_PROCESS, 0);" or should
we recalculate the return value with help of the NZERO definition?

A simple patch which works for me:

2002-03-02  Thorsten Kukuk  <kukuk@suse.de>

        * sysdeps/unix/nice.c: Use getpriority() for the return value
 
--- sysdeps/unix/nice.c
+++ sysdeps/unix/nice.c 2002/03/02 09:40:14
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@

   result = setpriority (PRIO_PROCESS, 0, prio + incr);
   if (result != -1)
-    return prio + incr;
+    return getpriority (PRIO_PROCESS, 0);
   else
     return -1;


-- 
Thorsten Kukuk       http://www.suse.de/~kukuk/        kukuk@suse.de
SuSE Linux AG        Deutschherrenstr. 15-19       D-90429 Nuernberg
--------------------------------------------------------------------    
Key fingerprint = A368 676B 5E1B 3E46 CFCE  2D97 F8FD 4E23 56C6 FB4B
Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]