xiaoxiang781216 commented on code in PR #7083:
URL: https://github.com/apache/incubator-nuttx/pull/7083#discussion_r972066779
##########
net/socket/getsockopt.c:
##########
@@ -337,50 +337,51 @@ int psock_getsockopt(FAR struct socket *psock, int level,
int option,
return -EBADF;
}
- /* Handle retrieval of the socket option according to the level at which
- * option should be applied.
- */
+#ifdef CONFIG_NET_USRSOCK
+ /* Try usrsock further if the protocol not available */
- switch (level)
+ if (psock->s_type == SOCK_USRSOCK_TYPE)
{
- case SOL_SOCKET: /* Socket-level options (see include/sys/socket.h) */
- ret = psock_socketlevel_option(psock, option, value, value_len);
- break;
+ ret = usrsock_getsockopt(psock->s_conn, level,
+ option, value, value_len);
+ }
+ else
Review Comment:
If so, usrsock isn't transparent as before, no application expect call
setsockopt with different argument but for the same thing. What I suggest is
that you should forward the ioctl to the default handle if usrsock driver
return some special error code(e.g. -ENOPROTOOPT), so the usrsock driver can
enable the default action in some special case at least.
Do you fully implement the usrsock driver? After that, you can understand
what I mean the noblocking/async for usrsock.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@nuttx.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
