[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091001221706.GA5191@obsidianresearch.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 16:17:06 -0600
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Volker Lendecke <vl@...ba.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Splice on blocking TCP sockets again..
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 08:00:04AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >> I admit I don't understand why SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK exists, it seems very
> >> un-unixy to have a syscall completely ignore the NONBLOCK flag of the
> >> fd it is called on. Ie setting NONBLOCK on the pipe itself does
> >> nothing when using splice..
> >
> > Hmm, good question, I dont have the answer but I'll digg one.
> >
>
> commit 29e350944fdc2dfca102500790d8ad6d6ff4f69d
> splice: add SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK flag
>
> It doesn't make the splice itself necessarily nonblocking (because the
> actual file descriptors that are spliced from/to may block unless they
> have the O_NONBLOCK flag set), but it makes the splice pipe operations
> nonblocking.
>
> Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
>
> See Linus intention was pretty clear : O_NONBLOCK should be taken
> into account by 'actual file that are spliced from/to', regardless
> of SPLICE_F_NONBLOCK flag
Yes, that seems reasonable.
What confuses me is that if O_NONBLOCK is set on the _pipe_ and
SPICE_F_NONBLOCK is not set on the splice call the splice still blocks
- that is unlike other unix apis, eg MSG_DONTWAIT
It seems to me that SPICE_F_NONBLOCK should be or'd with O_NONBLOCK on
the pipe?
Thanks,
Jason
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists