httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chuck Murcko <ch...@telebase.com>
Subject Re: [Fwd: Re: socket error on APACHE v1.0]
Date Sat, 10 Feb 1996 15:14:24 GMT
Paul Richards liltingly intones:
> 
> ...discussion of accept() failures omitted...
>
> Does Linux's list of error codes match above or are there different
> cases where accept() can fail?
> 
I think Linux is more or less standard in accept() behavior, but it
is a different TCP/IP stack. I haven't seen them here, but I've got
a rather old Linux kernel (1.2.8).

> What was the reasoning behind the locking around accept()? I remember
> there being a lot of discussion but it was before I was really paying
> attention to development issues. Strikes me as *really* bogus that
> you have to use locking on system calls. Oh well, paves the way
> to threads I suppose :-)
> 
Systems where the socket library is really wriiten on top of streams
transport layer (SVR4). Eventually you hit a 1-deep connection accept
queue. That's what puzzles me about the problems with UnixWare 2.x.
accept() fails after HUP. Sounds like 'sockfds' never closing, or
ending up in some dumb state like TIME_WAIT.

chuck
Chuck Murcko	Telebase Systems, Inc.	Wayne PA	chuck@telebase.com
And now, on a lighter note:
The opossum is a very sophisticated animal.  It doesn't even get up
until 5 or 6 p.m.

Mime
View raw message