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 <>
To:	Alan Cox <>
Cc:	Ulrich Drepper <>,
	netdev <>
Subject: Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK

On Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 01:35:56PM -0400, Alan Cox ( 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
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists