On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 02:10:07PM -0800, Joe Stringer wrote: > On 15 January 2014 09:48, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > In the latter case, it's a (probably unlikely) race, and it does not > > appear that it is too hard to avoid, so maybe we should avoidit. > > > > I agree. > > Here's a concept that you could work from. It reflects what I have in > > mind, and it compiles, but I have not tested it at all. Feel free to > > start from it, if you like. > > > > As it turns out, nl_sock_recv__() is already handling the EINTR case. I > think that bringing the helper back in makes it a bit more clear how we're > handling different error cases. I'll fill in the gaps and send a new > version for review.
Sounds good, thanks. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
