netdev - Re: bind and O

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 22 Sep 2007 21:40:43 +0400
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
To:	Alan Cox <alan@...hat.com>
Cc:	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK

On Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 01:35:56PM -0400, Alan Cox (alan@...hat.com) wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 08:14:15PM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> > of operations. There are four ways where bind can fail:
> > 
> > 1. unsufficient rights - nothing can help here
> > 2. there is no memory - async binding can not help here too, since it
> > 	some memory just has to be allocated to save async request
> > 	somewhere.
> > 3. socket is locked.
> > 4. addres is being bound is in use.
> 
> For most protocols yes - but not all. For things like IP specifying O_NDELAY
> is meaningless on a bind it will always complete on the spot as you say

Yes, of course, bind conflict can be handled in different way as Ulrich noted - 
from checking bind bucket, to request remote node if address is in use or not.

-- 
	Evgeniy Polyakov
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html