On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 1:30 PM Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote: > > [CC += Davide] I'm not sure how active Davide is any more.. > I don't think this is correct. The epoll(7) manual page > sill carries the text written long ago by Davide Libenzi, > the creator of epoll: > > Since even with edge-triggered epoll, multiple events can be gen‐ > erated upon receipt of multiple chunks of data, the caller has the > option to specify the EPOLLONESHOT flag, to tell epoll to disable > the associated file descriptor after the receipt of an event with > epoll_wait(2). > > My reading of that text is that in the scenario that I describe a > readiness notification should be generated at step 3 (and indeed > should be generated whenever additional data bleeds into the channel). Hmm. That is unfortunate, because it basically exposes an internal wait queue implementation decision, not actual real semantics. I suspect it's easy enough to "fix" the regression with the attached patch. It's pretty nonsensical, but I guess there's not a lot of downside - if the pipe wasn't empty, there normally shouldn't be any non-epoll readers anyway. I'm busy merging, mind testing this odd patch out? It is _entirely_ untested, but from the symptoms I think it's the obvious fix. I did the same thing for the "reader starting out from a full pipe" case too. Linus