Re: UDP recvmsg blocks after select(), 2.6 bug?

[Willy Tarreau]

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 06, 2004 at 09:25:28PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
 
> The current setup has so far been found to break one app, after what
> three years. It can almost double performance. In this case it is very
> much POSIX_ME_HARDER, and perhaps longer term suggests the posix/sus
> people should revisit their API design.

Couldn't we simply make recvfrom() return 0 (no data) or -1 (whatever error)
in a case where select() had a reason to believe that there were data, but
that the copy function discovered that it was corrupted data ?

This should not impact performance and would let recvfrom() behave in a
smarter way. After all, I don't see a problem receiving 0 bytes.

Anyway, I'm all for non-blocking I/O, but I can understand the stupidity
of the situation.

Just a few thoughts, of course.
Willy

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/