On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 16:46 +0100, Samuel Ortiz wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 12:15:01PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > When we get part of a TCP response, we currently busy-wait until the
> > rest of the response arrives. Bad Sameo; no biscuit.
>
> Now I know that it takes a busy loop for getting patches from you ;)
Well it was only when it started calling recv() in a tight loop with
recv() returning *zero* that it really provoked me :)
> Thanks a lot for the patch. It wasn't working at first, mostly due to the
> following:
>
> > + while (reply->received < reply->len) {
> > + bytes_recv = recv(sk, reply + reply->received,
> > + reply->len - reply->received, 0);
> You want to recv your bytes on reply->buf, not reply.
Ah, crap. That will have been fun to debug, unless you were using
valgrind — sorry about that.
> I fixed that, and applied the patch, thanks again.
> Btw, you're on the AUTHORS file now too.
But not pushed out yet?
--
David Woodhouse Open Source Technology Centre
[email protected] Intel Corporation
_______________________________________________
connman mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.connman.net/listinfo/connman
