[lkml]   [2001]   [Aug]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRE: PROBLEM: select() says closed socket readable

> No. If there is a correct behaviour defined in a standard we should
> do that. Otherwise we should do what other systems do _unless_ there
> is a clear benefit to doing something else. In this case doing
> something else appears to create porting problems and confusion over
> what select(2) means without any clear benefit.

> Mike

There is a clear and significant benefit. Bugs that result in a program
calling 'select' on an unconnected socket will be easily and quickly
detected. During debugging, they can then be fixed. During release
execution, they can be worked around.

There are a large number of possible mistakes that can result in this
behavior. A program that heavily uses sockets could sometimes forget to
remove a socket from its active poll/select set. A program might
accidentally close the wrong socket (and that socket might get reused by a
subsequent call to 'socket'). It's nice to have a way to catch these. During
debug, socket errors are routinely logged or displayed, so this would get

Of course, this isn't so much of a benefit that it's worth violating a
standard like POSIX. But it could be considered enough of a benefit that
it's worth not being compatable outside the bounds of such a standard.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:58    [W:0.052 / U:0.564 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site