On Wed, 10 Dec 2025 16:26:39 GMT, Alan Bateman <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Oops. Didn't notice I had left the other calls out. Will add them now.
>> 
>> As for sendto() it's a lot less likely to block and I doubt it can block 
>> indefinitely, but I imagine it can block if socket buffer is full. I don't 
>> have a strong preference. If EINTR can be returned maybe it should be 
>> handled the same way?
>
>> As for sendto() it's a lot less likely to block and I doubt it can block 
>> indefinitely, but I imagine it can block if socket buffer is full. I don't 
>> have a strong preference. If EINTR can be returned maybe it should be 
>> handled the same way?
> 
> Hard to test but I suspect the packet will be dropped rather than blocking. 
> So my guess is that retry here can be simple and doesn't need to use the 
> timeout.

getaddrinfo() and getnameinfo() can potentially return EINTR. The main blocking 
call in these files is NET_Wait, which is already restarting in the case of 
EINTR (along with all other errno values). The question is should we be 
returning an error if errno is _not_ EINTR?

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28750#discussion_r2607413746

Reply via email to