Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2003 12:18:14 +0400 (MSD) From: Dmitry Morozovsky <marck@rinet.ru> To: Lev Walkin <vlm@netli.com> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: if bpf fd's select()able? Message-ID: <20030908121326.R55683@woozle.rinet.ru> In-Reply-To: <3F5C39B3.2010001@netli.com> References: <20030907233940.M18589@woozle.rinet.ru> <3F5BB991.2050601@netli.com> <20030908113632.R55683@woozle.rinet.ru> <3F5C3549.8050607@netli.com> <20030908120036.V55683@woozle.rinet.ru> <3F5C39B3.2010001@netli.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 8 Sep 2003, Lev Walkin wrote: LW> > However, I found a (really stupid, yeah) bug: the first parameter of select() LW> > in this test case should be fd+1, not 1 ;-) LW> LW> Unfortunately, this could not possibly be the case, if your system's LW> documentation is in sync with the reality: LW> LW> === select(2) === LW> For historical reasons, LW> select() will always examine the first 256 descriptors. LW> === cut === Well, I suppose either this part of the documentation is obsolete, or something else went wrong, but: this select() works with fd+1 on both 4.8-R and 4.9-PRE, and does not work with both 1 and fd as nfd. I check the fd to be 3 in all cases. I did not dig into select() sources yet, though. Sincerely, D.Marck [DM5020, MCK-RIPE, DM3-RIPN] ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *** Dmitry Morozovsky --- D.Marck --- Wild Woozle --- marck@rinet.ru *** ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030908121326.R55683>