Re: raw sockets and blocking

[Jamie Lokier]

Paul Jakma wrote:
> > 	It is, however, perfectly legal to say an operation can
> > complete without blocking (say, through 'select' or 'poll') and
> > later return EWOULDBLOCK. (So long as some operation could have
> > completed, not necessarily the one you tried.)
> 
> Right. But that's fine, we can deal with that, if the error is
> posted.
> 
> Problem is no error is posted when we sendmsg[1], yet the socket
> thereafter stays write-blocked, with (sane) way for us to recover.  

I hate to check the obvious, but did you try setting the O_NONBLOCK
flag for the socket?  Did you try setting the MSG_DONTWAIT flag for
the sendmsg operation?

-- Jamie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/