Message183680
| Author |
neologix |
| Recipients |
eric.araujo, giampaolo.rodola, neologix, pitrou, rosslagerwall |
| Date |
2013年03月07日.16:38:57 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<CAH_1eM1_a4G1X9Ag9RAxjkR1Nf1xhapwJnUYbQvSpDY4tmZCwg@mail.gmail.com> |
| In-reply-to |
<1362671217.34.0.378720569679.issue13564@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| Content |
> Then why 'offset' and 'count' parameters have a different data type?
Because offsets can be negative (e.g. for lseek), while a size can't.
That's why 'count' is size_t, not ssize_t.
>> Furthermore, since sendfile actually supports only regular file and regular
>> files don't support non-blocking I/O, it's unlikely to ever happen.
>
> EAGAIN is caused by the socket fd not being ready yet, not the file fd.
> Please try the patch before making such assumptions.
I didn't see the socket could be set to non-blocking.
In that case, there's a problem with the patch, since select can block
arbitrarily long because it doesn't take the socket timeout into
account.
Also, apparently socket.sendall() doesn't retry on EAGAIN, it doesn't
use BEGIN_SELECT_LOOP.
The risk of false positive (EAGAIN after select reported ready)
shouldn't be as bad as for sendto(), since usually you'll just get a
partial write for a stream oriented socket, but this could be bad for
e.g. a SCTP socket (since it's message-oriented).
> We're going OT here.
I'm leaving this topic, you can do as you like... |
|