[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1366915736.8964.171.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 11:48:56 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Benjamin Poirier <bpoirier@...e.de>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/3] unix/dgram: peek beyond 0-sized skbs
On Thu, 2013-04-25 at 09:47 -0400, Benjamin Poirier wrote:
> "77c1090 net: fix infinite loop in __skb_recv_datagram()" (v3.8) introduced a
> regression:
> After that commit, recv can no longer peek beyond a 0-sized skb in the queue.
> __skb_recv_datagram() instead stops at the first skb with len == 0 and results
> in the system call failing with -EFAULT via skb_copy_datagram_iovec().
if MSG_PEEK is not used, what happens here ?
It doesn't look right to me that we return -EFAULT if skb->len is 0,
EFAULT is reserved to faulting (ie reading/writing at least one byte)
How are we telling the user message had 0 byte, but its not EOF ?
--
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