On 03:37+0700, Aug 12, 2002, Semen A. Ustimenko wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, Robert Watson wrote:
> > On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, Maxim Konovalov wrote:
> > > This is sendfile(2) mis-behaviour arised after rev.1.109
> > > sys/kern/uipc_syscalls.c but I think the real problem in vn_rdwr(),
> > > sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c. Here is my patch but I really need somebody with
> > > vfs clue. I CC'ed Robert Watson as an author of sendfile(2)
> > > modification and our vfs expert.
> > Semen Ustimenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ran into a similar problem, but his
> > fix was to teach sendfile() to pass in a non-NULL resid and handle the
> > failure mode better. I suspect this fix is more correct since it will
> > both handle the failure mode and the data delivered, and probably is
> > required for other consumers of vn_rdwr(). He was going to run the patch
> > past dg, and then commit it assuming dg approved it, so hopefully it will
> > go into the tree in the next day or so.
> David reviewed the patch and I have committed it few minutes ago.
Looks like a hack BDE is speaking about: passing a storage for residue
but never check it.
Anyway I don't understand why VOP_READ in vn_rdwr() returns a residue
in uio.uio_resid when all data trasferred actually?
Maxim Konovalov, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message