[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1727AECC@AcuExch.aculab.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:33:27 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo' <acme@...nel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: Linux Networking Development Mailing List
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Caitlin Bestler <caitlin.bestler@...il.com>,
Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...driver.com>,
Elie De Brauwer <eliedebrauwer@...il.com>,
Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
Ondřej Bílka <neleai@...nam.cz>,
Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi@...lab.net>,
Steven Whitehouse <steve@...gwyn.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH/RFC] net: Don't save mid batch datagram processing error
for next recvmmsg call
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> I think this addresses the problems reported by David Laight and
> others, where errors saved on a per socket area could be delivered to a
> different thread, so I just followed David Laight's suggestion and
> stopped saving it, we'll return it only if it happens for the first
> datagram, else we return less entries than asked for.
>
> Steven, IIRC you was the one that suggested using this
> mechanism, no? Do you have anything against this move?
+ return datagrams ?: err;
Inline patches, don't attach them.
Don't use non-C constructs.
David
--
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