On Thu, 27 Jul 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 07/26/2017 08:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> +count++;
> +else
> +
> wait_event_interruptible(map->active.inflight
On 07/26/2017 08:08 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
+ count++;
+ else
+ wait_event_interruptible(map->active.inflight_conn_req,
+ pvcalls_front_read_t
On Wed, 26 Jul 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> >> + count++;
> >> + else
> >> + wait_event_interruptible(map->active.inflight_conn_req,
> >> + pvcalls_front_read_todo(map));
> >> + }
> > Should we be using PVCALLS_
>> +while (!(flags & MSG_DONTWAIT) && !pvcalls_front_read_todo(map)) {
>> +if (count < PVCALLS_FRONT_MAX_SPIN)
>> +count++;
>> +else
>> +wait_event_interruptible(map->active.inflight_conn_req,
>> +
On 07/25/2017 05:22 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> Implement recvmsg by copying data from the "in" ring. If not enough data
> is available and the recvmsg call is blocking, then wait on the
> inflight_conn_req waitqueue. Take the active socket in_mutex so that
> only one function can access the ri
