On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Matt Caswell <matt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 02/05/17 06:59, mahesh gs wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> Sorry for delayed response. I was on leave.
>
> Yes, ours is a library and we do not wish to ignore the signal process
> wide because the consumer of our library (application) might want to
> handle the SIGPIPE for there own socket handling.
Could you use pthread_sigmask() to only block SIGPIPE for the current
thread (perhaps unblocking it again before returning control back to the
caller of your library)?
Thanks for your suggestion. We will try to adapt this work around.
>
> Thanks,
> Mahesh G S
>
> On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Matt Caswell <matt@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:matt@xxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 27/04/17 11:56, mahesh gs wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are using Openssl for establish a secure communications for both
> > TCP/SCTP connections.
> >
> > In our application it is possible that remote end forcefully disconnect
> > the connection due to which
> >
> > SSL_Write raises a SIGPIPE which we want to suppress. Does openssl
> >
> > provide any way to set MSG_NOSIGNAL on sendmsg (Underlying TCP/IP socket
> > layer) ?
>
> No, there is no option to do that at the moment.
>
> >
> > Unfortunately we cannot use "setsockopt" with "SO_NOSIGPIPE" as it is
> > not supported by LINUX
> >
> > and also we are unable to stop the SIGPIPE with function call
> > signal(SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN).
>
> Unable because you want SIGPIPE for other areas of your application? Or
> for some other reason?
>
> Matt
> --
> openssl-users mailing list
> To unsubscribe:
> https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
> <https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users >
>
>
>
>
--
openssl-users mailing list
To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
-- openssl-users mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-users
