lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Jun]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Bug in short splice to socket?
Date
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> 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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-06-02 13:47    [W:0.152 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site