[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <tencent_388496926EE0228075FA6B3D@qq.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 13:32:23 +0800
From: "ZHOU Xiaobo" <xb.zhou@...com>
To: "Rick Jones" <rick.jones2@...com>,
"Huajun Li" <huajun.li.lee@...il.com>
Cc: "netdev" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: write() udp socket
------------------
Sincerely yours
ZHOU Xiaobo
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Rick Jones"<rick.jones2@...com>;
Date: Tue, Jul 26, 2011 01:38 AM
To: "Huajun Li"<huajun.li.lee@...il.com>;
Cc: "ZHOU Xiaobo"<xb.zhou@...com>; "netdev"<netdev@...r.kernel.org>;
Subject: Re: write() udp socket
On 07/24/2011 01:33 AM, Huajun Li wrote:
> 2011/7/23 ZHOU Xiaobo<xb.zhou@...com>:
>> question No1:
>> When I call
>> ssize_t write(int fd, const void *buf, size_t count);
>>
>>
>> on a nonblocking UDP socket, is the return value always equal to 'count'?
>>
>>
>
> I don't think so. The function may be interrupt by signal or return
> due to other reason, so the return value only represents the size it
> writes successfully to the fd.
I believe it should either appaear to succeed or fail. write() best not
be sending partial UDP datagrams. That would be "bad."
yeah, the same as I think. If so the answer of Question No.2 is 'yes' too?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists