[1061] in linux-net channel archive
Re: zero-length fragments strike again
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Rick Sladkey)
Wed Sep 6 15:15:06 1995
From: jrs@world.std.com (Rick Sladkey)
To: Werner Almesberger <almesber@lrc.epfl.ch>
Cc: iialan@iifeak.swan.ac.uk, rzsfl@rz.uni-sb.de, hjl@nynexst.com,
linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu
In-Reply-To: almesber@lrc.epfl.ch's message
of Thu, 31 Aug 1995 22:44:07 +0200
Date: Wed, 6 Sep 1995 00:44:14 EDT
> From: Werner Almesberger <almesber@lrc.epfl.ch>
> Subject: zero-length fragments strike again
> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 22:44:07 +0200 (MET DST)
> The second (minor) problem is that fs/nfs/sock.c:do_nfs_rpc_call
> overwrites the -EIO (for the NFS timeout) with a -EAGAIN (for the
> recvfrom it attempts a bit later).
I'll fix this problem, thanks.
> The third (slightly nastier) problem is that ld 2.5.2.6/BFD2.5 (or
> is it libc 4.6.27 ?) seems to ignore the write error it gets when
> that bug hits ...
Actually, this is correct, I think. The C library should ignore
aEAGAIN when it occurs beause of interrupts. If the call returned EIO
as it should have all would be well.
