On Fri, Jun 01, 2018 at 02:16:59PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > On 01/06/2018 14:05, Sergio Lopez wrote: > >>> Instead of adding explicit handling of EPIPE, shouldn't the code be > >>> rewritten to treat -1 return && errno != EAGAIN as fatal? > >> Yes, exactly this code is already broken for every single errno > >> value, not simply EPIPE. It needs fixing to treat '-1' return code > >> correctly instead of retrying everything. > > Given that EAGAIN is already taken care of in > > chardev/char.c:qemu_chr_write_buffer, in which cases should we retry? Or > > should we just drop all the tsr_retry logic? > > It's not handled there, the call from qemu_chr_fe_write has write_all == > false.
You're right. So should we just retry only for -1 && errno == EAGAIN and just ignore the error otherwise? Sergio.
