Roland Dreier writes:
> This looks a little suspicious:
>
> > nfds = fds;
> > res = select(fdcnt, &nfds, 0, 0, 0);
> > if (res == -1) {
> > perror("select");
> > return -1;
> > }
> >=20
> > if (FD_ISSET(cb->cm_channel->fd, &fds)) {
> > // got a disconnect event?
>
> you set nfds to fds, pass &nfds into select() and then check if the
> cm_channel fd is set in the original fds. Seems wrong to me.
That would be it. I'll be slinking away in embarrassment now. I guess I
just needed another pair of eyes.
> Not sure why you need two fd_set variables anyway. (And IMHO select()
> is obsolete and should never be used ... poll() is a better interface in
> every way, and if you can take a bit more complexity epoll is better still)
The fact that there are two fd_set variables is an artifact from the
original program, which has a bit more complexity. I thought I had
distilled the code down to the essentials, but I obviously had not.
Thanks for the advise about select. In what way is select obsolete?
Thanks again,
-bryan
>
> - R.
> --
> Roland Dreier <[email protected]> || For corporate legal information go to:
> http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
