Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2010 23:14:36 +0300 From: Mikolaj Golub <to.my.trociny@gmail.com> To: "Robert N. M. Watson" <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Nikolay Denev <ndenev@gmail.com>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-stable-8@freebsd.org, svn-src-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r208692 - stable/8/sys/kern Message-ID: <86wrui4ij7.fsf@kopusha.home.net> In-Reply-To: <57DF5801-1685-4C69-9FD3-E56F5425E28C@FreeBSD.org> (Robert N. M. Watson's message of "Tue, 1 Jun 2010 15:39:01 %2B0100") References: <201006011359.o51DxmSW050166@svn.freebsd.org> <2E4C7566-1F0E-4A44-8514-061FF1E129DE@gmail.com> <57DF5801-1685-4C69-9FD3-E56F5425E28C@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 1 Jun 2010 15:39:01 +0100 Robert N. M. Watson wrote: RNMW> On 1 Jun 2010, at 15:23, Nikolay Denev wrote: >>> When close() is called on a connected socket pair, SO_ISCONNECTED might be >>> set but be cleared before the call to sodisconnect(). In this case, >>> ENOTCONN is returned: suppress this error rather than returning it to >>> userspace so that close() doesn't report an error improperly. >>> >>> PR: kern/144061 >>> Reported by: Matt Reimer <mreimer at vpop.net>, >>> Nikolay Denev <ndenev at gmail.com>, >>> Mikolaj Golub <to.my.trociny at gmail.com> >> I wonder, does this affect RELENG_7 ? (can't test at the moment, but sys/kern/uipc_socket.c:soclose() looks similar) RNMW> Yes, almost certainly -- if it doesn't manifest, it's just because of RNMW> timing differences, not because the bug isn't present. I'll look at RNMW> merging it to 7.x as well. Actually these were 7.1 servers where I noticed this problem fist. -- Mikolaj Golub
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86wrui4ij7.fsf>