| To: | khandelw@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant? |
| From: | Nick Palmer <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 13 Aug 2004 13:13:38 -0700 |
| Cc: | Alex Riesen <fork0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <1092256397.512046f64c822@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20040811194018.GA3971@xxxxxxxxxx> <1092256397.512046f64c822@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla Thunderbird 0.5 (X11/20040405) |
khandelw@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > select should work for any type of socket. Its based on the type of file > descriptor not whether it is stream/dgram. 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.> so why should recvmsg return error???? upon closing the socket in other thread? > wouldn't the socket linger around for some time... Only if SO_LINGER is on, and then only for the linger time. I would expect recvmsg to set errno to EINTR or EINVAL indicating that the recv message was interrupted or is no longer valid since the socket has closed. This is not the case. Instead it returns 0, and doesn't set errno. -Nick |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant?, Nick Palmer |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: 8390.c workaround for interrupt storm, Jeff Garzik |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant?, Alex Riesen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: select implementation not POSIX compliant?, Steven Dake |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |