On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 10:30:54AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 11/02/2010 05:42 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> >>
> >>> +#include <netinet/in.h>
> >>> +#include <netinet/tcp.h>
> >>
> >> Likewise for HAVE_NETINET_TCP_H.
> >
> > Doesn't gnulib take care of TCP socket portability for us ?
>
> So far, gnulib provides <netinet/in.h>, but not <netinet/tcp.h>. But
> what exactly are we using that's only in netinet/tcp.h? It may be easy
> to port to gnulib, since mingw does have tcp support (sys/un.h is the
> much harder task, since mingw has no notion of unix sockets).
It seems netinet/tcp.h is not required on either platform and we
don't need sys/un.h on Win32.
> >>> +static int virFDStreamWrite(virStreamPtr st, const char *bytes, size_t nbytes)
> >>
> >> Should this return ssize_t...
> >
> > No, this has to return an int, to match the public API calling
> > convention.
>
> Then we have to check for overflow, and explicitly return an error if
> nbytes > INT_MAX.
Ok
> >>> + if ((st->flags & VIR_STREAM_NONBLOCK) &&
> >>> + (!S_ISCHR(sb.st_mode) &&
> >>> + !S_ISFIFO(sb.st_mode))) {
> >>
> >> Should we also permit S_ISSOCK as an fd that supports reliable
> >> non-blocking behavior?
> >
> > AFAIK, there's no way to open a socket as a path on the
> > filesystem is there ? So there'd be no way that open(path)
> > could return an FD for which S_ISSOCK() is true.
>
> You're probably right that it's not possible to bind a socket to a
> standard file system. But it is possible via procfs (think
> /proc/nnn/fd/nnn of a process which already has a socket open), and
> there might also be some magic /dev/ or /sys/ mappings that can provide
> a socket (at any rate, bash provides magic handling of
> /dev/tcp/host/port, whether or not the kernel also has a magic
> filesystem to provide that support automatically). So it boils down to
> a question of whether we want to permit or reject sockets, on the
> pre-condition that the user finds a way to hand us a filename that
> resolves to a socket.
I tried add S_ISSOCK() too, but gnulib #defines this to '0' which
then causes gcc to issue a warning that the expression always
evaluates to true, because we build with -Wlogical-op. So I've
left this change out.
Daniel
--
|: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :|
|: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://deltacloud.org :|
|: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
|: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|
--
libvir-list mailing list
libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list