On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 12:01:48PM +0200, Uri Lublin wrote:
> On 03/06/2018 03:53 PM, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
> > Currently if we fail to set up the watch waiting for accept() to be
> > called on the socket, we still keep the network socket open even if we
> > are not going to be able to use it.
On 03/06/2018 03:53 PM, Christophe Fergeau wrote:
Currently if we fail to set up the watch waiting for accept() to be
called on the socket, we still keep the network socket open even if we
are not going to be able to use it. This commit makes sure it's closed a
set to -1 when such a failure
On Tue, Mar 06, 2018 at 11:38:15AM -0500, Frediano Ziglio wrote:
> Looks fine.
> Actually when this function returns -1 spice_server_init returns -1 and Qemu
> calls exit so there's no much difference at runtime.
> But I suppose this is necessary for your tests.
I did not try the tests without
>
> Currently if we fail to set up the watch waiting for accept() to be
> called on the socket, we still keep the network socket open even if we
> are not going to be able to use it. This commit makes sure it's closed a
> set to -1 when such a failure occurs.
> ---
> server/reds.c | 5 +
> 1
