On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 00:30:53 +0000 "Myklebust, Trond" <Trond.Myklebust@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 2013-11-13 at 11:23 +1100, NeilBrown wrote: > > But back to my problem: Following Trond's suggestion I've come up with the > > following patch. Does it look right? > > > > The "fd = -1" is just to stop us trying to close a non-open fd in an error > > path. > > > > The change from testing ->servicename to ->prog stops us from repeating the > > failed DNS lookup on every request, not that the failure isn't fatal. > > > > The last stanza makes sure we always reply to an upcall, with EINVAL if > > nothing else seems appropriate. > > Wouldn't EACCES be more appropriate as a default? > Maybe. And that is what you suggested before and I mis-remembered - sorry. However EACCES is "Permission denied" which doesn't quite seem right to me. It isn't really "you aren't allowed to do that", but "your question doesn't make sense". However I'm not fussed. If you prefer EACCES, then I'll make it EACCES. Thanks, NeilBrown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
