Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*select\s+implementation\s+not\s+POSIX\s+compliant\?\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: Hemminger <shemminger@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:40:18 +0200
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg00267.html (10,427 bytes)

2. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: vel Machek <pavel@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:33:17 -0400
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg00270.html (11,957 bytes)

3. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: lyakov <johnpol@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:23:16 +0200
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg00274.html (8,809 bytes)

4. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: <demon@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:57:29 -0700
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg00275.html (11,613 bytes)

5. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:12:56 -0700
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg00326.html (9,748 bytes)

6. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: nger@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:13:38 -0700
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg00327.html (8,927 bytes)

7. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: Alex Riesen <fork0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 21:40:18 +0200
It works always for stream sockets and does not at all (even with shutdown, even using poll(2) or read(2) instead of select) for dgram sockets. What domain (inet, local) are your sockets in? What typ
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg01158.html (10,502 bytes)

8. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: khandelw@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 16:33:17 -0400
select should work for any type of socket. Its based on the type of file descriptor not whether it is stream/dgram. man recvmsg - recvmsg() may be used to receive data on a socket whether it is in a
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg01161.html (12,045 bytes)

9. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: Alex Riesen <fork0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 23:23:16 +0200
I missed the point: threads! _Not_ duplicated handles. Ignore me.
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg01165.html (8,902 bytes)

10. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: Steven Dake <sdake@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 14:57:29 -0700
You will find poll works as you desire but select does not. I recommend porting to poll anyway; select sucks bad. You might even try out epoll in 2.6. Thanks Good luck
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg01166.html (11,701 bytes)

11. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: Nick Palmer <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:12:56 -0700
Alex Riesen wrote: On linux-kernel, Nick Palmer wrote: The application expects that a close call on a socket that another thread is blocking in select and/or recvmsg on will cause select and/or recvm
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg01217.html (9,949 bytes)

12. Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? (score: 1)
Author: Nick Palmer <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:13:38 -0700
Agreed, but as Alex Riesen has shown with his test case, the behavior differs based on the type of socket. This doesn't seem quite right, but was not my original point. other thread? Only if SO_LINGE
/archives/netdev/2004-08/msg01218.html (8,943 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu