Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Do what I already suggested: making SPLICE_F_MORE reflect reality. I'm trying to. I need MSG_MORE to behave sensibly for what I want. What I have signals SPLICE_F_MORE (and thus MSG_MORE) as long as we haven't yet read enough data to fulfill the request - and will break out of the loop if we get a zero-length read. But this causes a change in behaviour because we then leave the protocol having seen MSG_MORE set where it didn't previously see that. This causes "tls -r tls.12_aes_gcm.multi_chunk_sendfile" on the TLS kselftest to fail. Now, if we're fine with the change in behaviour, I can make the selftest observe the short sendfile() and cancel MSG_MORE itself - but that's just a test program. So that's the question: Do I have to maintain the current behaviour for the short-splice case? David
