Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 00:55:15 -0800 From: "David G. Lawrence" <dg@root.com> To: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] sendfile erroniously returns ENOTCONN. Message-ID: <20040103085515.GR213@nexus.dglawrence.com> In-Reply-To: <20040103060156.GV9623@elvis.mu.org> References: <20040103005338.GU9623@elvis.mu.org> <20040103054115.GV56722@nexus.dglawrence.com> <20040103060156.GV9623@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> * David G. Lawrence <dg@dglawrence.com> [040102 21:41] wrote: > > > > sendfile(8) tries to maintain compatibility with sosend as much as is > > reasonable. ENOTCONN is the appropriate error to return if the socket > > isn't connected. sosend checks SS_CANTSENDMORE prior to the check for > > SS_ISCONNECTED, however, and returns EPIPE in that case. Perhaps sendfile > > should be changed to do the same (just a though - I'm not proposing > > that this be done). > > Removing the check entirely seems clearly wrong, however. > > I had forgotten that sendfile bypasses sosend(9). I could > add the check, is there a reason not to? The one reason I > figured was that sometimes blocking sigpipe can be hairy inside > libraries. Now that we can selectively disable SIGPIPE using > the setsockopt using Apple's code this is less of an issue. Yes, I think checking for SS_CATSENDMORE (and returning EPIPE) prior to checking SS_ISCONNECTED (and returning ENOTCONN as it does now) is the right thing to do. -DG David G. Lawrence President Download Technologies, Inc. - http://www.downloadtech.com - (866) 399 8500 TeraSolutions, Inc. - http://www.terasolutions.com - (888) 346 7175 The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org Pave the road of life with opportunities.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20040103085515.GR213>