Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 16:08:11 +0200 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Boris Astardzhiev <boris.astardzhiev@gmail.com> Cc: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>, net@freebsd.org, threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Does FreeBSD have sendmmsg or recvmmsg system calls? Message-ID: <20160118140811.GW3942@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <CAP=KkTy3J=k7hokGhohcGXv%2BWLnaxJmiAPxqmX9FHt7k0=Dp7Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <20160108204606.G2420@besplex.bde.org> <CAJ-Vmom26mukSv3JmsmNiAONvpc6f1bQ%2BujO25qefGHY=5przA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP=KkTwG0SVUmrBuWm33EC-tG4tMTdF5rLZQ_u6G1=-ujnfjkA@mail.gmail.com> <20160113080349.GC72455@kib.kiev.ua> <CAP=KkTxVaqZvigg78Dg%2Bv8kuTCaZyky8x15NHqD9uabuRKRkMw@mail.gmail.com> <20160116195657.GJ3942@kib.kiev.ua> <20160116202534.GK3942@kib.kiev.ua> <20160117211853.GA37847@stack.nl> <20160118044826.GS3942@kib.kiev.ua> <CAP=KkTy3J=k7hokGhohcGXv%2BWLnaxJmiAPxqmX9FHt7k0=Dp7Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 12:37:01PM +0200, Boris Astardzhiev wrote: > Hello, > > Sorry for the delay of my reply. As far as I understand pthread_testcancel() > is not necessary in the recvmmsg syscall since cancellation is not quite > common > among apps. But if there is cancellation attempts as long as I use > __sys_recvmsg() instead > of the interposing approach on a cancel attempt recvmmsg() will return > EINTR which will get > me out? Yes. The corner case is the cancellation attempt (SIGCANCEL == SIGTHR) coming while the thread is executing code around the syscall. > > Secondly, I guess it's better to use __sys_sendmmsg() similarly instead of > the > insterposing table regarding sendmmsg(). Sure, sendmmsg and recvmmsg are same. > > Lastly, regarding the manpage - should I extend send/recv(2) for the new > calls or > create new manpage files? IMO it is more logical to extend the existing page than write a new one.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20160118140811.GW3942>