On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 03:58:11PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> On 21.07.2016 15:58, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 03:42:54PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> >> On 21.07.2016 15:35, Yuanhan Liu wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 03:13:14PM +0300, Ilya Maximets wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What do you think of it?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I found that we can't check connection status without select/poll
> >>>>> on it. 'getsockopt()' will return 0 with no errors if connection
> >>>>> is not still established just like if it was.
> >>>>> So, I think, the first version of this patch is the only
> >>>>> acceptable solution.
> >>>>
> >>>> Sorry, v2 is acceptable too, because it always calls 'connect()'.
> >>>
> >>> So you have done the test that it works?
> >>
> >> No, it's just theory. I don't know how to test this.
> >>
> >>> I'm more curious to know
> >>> could your above case hit the getsockopt() code path, I mean, the
> >>> path that errno is set to EINPROGRESS or EISCONN?
> >>
> >> As I already told, I don't sure that we're able to get EINPROGRESS
> >> on our AF_UNIX sockets.
> >> In v2 'getsockopt()' check is unnecessary.
> >
> > We then have no reason to keep it?
>
> You want me to re-send v2 without 'getsockopt()' check?
Yes, because I'm not sure it will work without select or poll.
--yliu
