From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 9 15:00:28 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BC301065672 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:00:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0AB8A8FC08 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:00:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pB9F0RNP020397 for ; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:00:27 GMT (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id pB9F0R5r020396; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:00:27 GMT (envelope-from gnats) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:00:27 GMT Message-Id: <201112091500.pB9F0R5r020396@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" Cc: Subject: Re: kern/163076: It is not possible to read in chunks from linprocfs and procfs. X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Poul-Henning Kamp List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 15:00:28 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/163076; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" To: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= Cc: Jaakko Heinonen , Petr Salinger , bug-followup@FreeBSD.org, mdf@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/163076: It is not possible to read in chunks from linprocfs and procfs. Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2011 14:51:15 +0000 In message <86d3bxaljt.fsf@ds4.des.no>, =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= wr ites: >Jaakko Heinonen writes: >> As I wrote existing code depends on sbuf_len() to return the actual >> length regardless of the error status after sbuf_finish(). I am not >> willing to through all code using sbufs to check where it causes >> problems. phk@ asserts that r222004 is correct. > >What if the sbuf is in a state where asking for its length is >meaningless? It will always have a length, but the length may not represent all you tried to stuff into the sbuf, if the sbuf has failed. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.