On 10/29/2018 08:31 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
> We return 0 in the case of a nonblocking socket that has no data
> available. However, this is incorrect and may confuse applications.
> After this patch we do the correct thing and return the error
> EAGAIN.
>
> Quoting return codes from recvmsg
On Mon, Oct 29, 2018 at 1:32 PM John Fastabend wrote:
>
> On 10/29/2018 12:31 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
> > We return 0 in the case of a nonblocking socket that has no data
> > available. However, this is incorrect and may confuse applications.
> > After this patch we do the correct thing and
On 10/29/2018 12:31 PM, John Fastabend wrote:
> We return 0 in the case of a nonblocking socket that has no data
> available. However, this is incorrect and may confuse applications.
> After this patch we do the correct thing and return the error
> EAGAIN.
>
> Quoting return codes from recvmsg
We return 0 in the case of a nonblocking socket that has no data
available. However, this is incorrect and may confuse applications.
After this patch we do the correct thing and return the error
EAGAIN.
Quoting return codes from recvmsg manpage,
EAGAIN or EWOULDBLOCK
The socket is marked