Re: poll(2) semantics changed in 2.4.0-? vs. 2.2.16?

From: Andi Kleen (ak@suse.de)
Date: Thu Oct 05 2000 - 23:45:38 EDT

  • Next message: Daniel Phillips: "Re: evil patents"

    On Fri, Oct 06, 2000 at 02:13:45AM +0200, Martin Diehl wrote:
    > So, for me the 2.4.0-test9 behavior does not only differ from 2.2 and what
    > manpages say - I'm just wondering how to detect the unreachable peer port?
    > poll()-timeout means no response at all, which is sth different and forces
    > blocking for some time. Nonblocking recvfrom() without poll() wouldn't
    > help, since the pending error isn't passed to it either.

    Alexey Kuznetsov (kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru) changed it. Ask him why he did it,
    I agree with you that it would make more sense to keep the old behaviour
    (even though it is differing from most other BSD sockets implementations)

    To answer your question: you'll only get the error reported now when the
    UDP socket is either connect(2)ed or when you enabled asynchronous
    error reporting using IP_RECVERR.

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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 05 2000 - 23:48:32 EDT