On 03:37+0700, Aug 12, 2002, Semen A. Ustimenko wrote: > Hi! > > On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, Robert Watson wrote: > > > On Sun, 11 Aug 2002, Maxim Konovalov wrote: > > > > > This is sendfile(2) mis-behaviour arised after rev.1.109 > > > sys/kern/uipc_syscalls.c but I think the real problem in vn_rdwr(), > > > sys/kern/vfs_vnops.c. Here is my patch but I really need somebody with > > > vfs clue. I CC'ed Robert Watson as an author of sendfile(2) > > > modification and our vfs expert. > > > > Semen Ustimenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ran into a similar problem, but his > > fix was to teach sendfile() to pass in a non-NULL resid and handle the > > failure mode better. I suspect this fix is more correct since it will > > both handle the failure mode and the data delivered, and probably is > > required for other consumers of vn_rdwr(). He was going to run the patch > > past dg, and then commit it assuming dg approved it, so hopefully it will > > go into the tree in the next day or so. > > > > David reviewed the patch and I have committed it few minutes ago.
Looks like a hack BDE is speaking about: passing a storage for residue but never check it. Anyway I don't understand why VOP_READ in vn_rdwr() returns a residue in uio.uio_resid when all data trasferred actually? -- Maxim Konovalov, [EMAIL PROTECTED] To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
