[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070927154144.7de2a719@freepuppy.rosehill>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2007 15:41:44 -0700
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Zero-length write() does not generate a datagram on
connected socket
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 13:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:34:35 -0700
>
> > The bug http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5731
> > describes an issue where write() can't be used to generate a zero-length
> > datagram (but send, and sendto do work).
> >
> > I think the following is needed:
> >
> > --- a/net/socket.c 2007-08-20 09:54:28.000000000 -0700
> > +++ b/net/socket.c 2007-09-24 15:31:25.000000000 -0700
> > @@ -777,8 +777,11 @@ static ssize_t sock_aio_write(struct kio
> > if (pos != 0)
> > return -ESPIPE;
> >
> > - if (iocb->ki_left == 0) /* Match SYS5 behaviour */
> > - return 0;
> > + if (unlikely(iocb->ki_left == 0)) {
> > + struct socket *sock = iocb->ki_filp->private_data;
> > + if (sock->type == SOCK_STREAM)
> > + return 0;
> > + }
> >
> > x = alloc_sock_iocb(iocb, &siocb);
> > if (!x)
>
> We should simply remove the check completely.
>
> There is no need to add special code for different types of protocols
> and sockets.
>
> As is hinted in the bugzilla, the exact same thing can happen with a
> suitably constructed sendto() or sendmsg() call. write() on a socket
> is a sendmsg() with a NULL msg_control and a single entry iovec, plain
> and simple.
>
> It's how BSD and many other systems behave, and I double checked
> Steven's Volume 2 just to make sure.
>
> So I'm going to check in the following to fix this bugzilla. There is
> a similarly ugly test for len==0 in sys_read() on sockets. If someone
> would do some research on the validity of that thing I'd really
> appreciate it :-)
Read of zero length should be a no-op for SOCK_STREAM but
for SOCK_DATAGRAM or SOCK_SEQPACKET it might be useful as a
remote wait for event.
--
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
-
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists