Re: accept() doesn't block as it should in 2.3.x kernels
Pete Wyckoff (wyckoff@ca.sandia.gov)
Sun, 12 Dec 1999 15:13:55 -0800
root@chaos.analogic.com said:
> > if (listen(s, 5) == -1) { perror("listen"); exit(1); }
> >
> > {
> > int s2;
> > int sa2_len;
> > struct sockaddr_un sa2;
> >
>
> Here, the length of sa2, passed to accept via sa2_len is undefined.
>
>
> The length should be initialized to the length of the structure so
> accept() knows how much space is available. Accept() is probably
> getting a 0, returning a bogus error-code.
>
> > if ((s2=accept(s, (struct sockaddr *)&sa2, &sa2_len)) == -1)
> > {perror("accept didn't block"); exit(1); }
> > }
> >
>
>
> Cheers,
> Dick Johnson
Yes, sa2_len should be initialized. No, accept() does the right thing
if it gets a bogus length (EINVAL). A zero length results in no copy
into sa2, but the syscall completes without error. Read the source.
-- Pete
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/