Amos Kong <ak...@redhat.com> writes:
> On 19/09/12 16:33, Amos Kong wrote:
>> On 14/09/12 02:58, Orit Wasserman wrote:
>>> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <m...@redhat.com>
>>>
>>> refactor address resolution code to fix nonblocking connect
>>> remove getnameinfo call
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Amos Kong <ak...@redhat.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Orit Wasserman <owass...@redhat.com>
>>
>> Hi Orit,
>>
>> Happy new year!
>>
>>> ---
>>> qemu-sockets.c | 144
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
>>> 1 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/qemu-sockets.c b/qemu-sockets.c
>>> index 361d890..939a453 100644
>>> --- a/qemu-sockets.c
>>> +++ b/qemu-sockets.c
>>> @@ -209,95 +209,113 @@ listen:
>>> return slisten;
>>> }
>>>
>>> -int inet_connect_opts(QemuOpts *opts, bool *in_progress, Error **errp)
>>> +#ifdef _WIN32
>>> +#define QEMU_SOCKET_RC_INPROGRESS(rc) \
>>> + ((rc) == -EINPROGRESS || rc == -EWOULDBLOCK || rc == -WSAEALREADY)
>
> ^^ Brackets are only be used for first 'rc'
>
>>> +#else
>>> +#define QEMU_SOCKET_RC_INPROGRESS(rc) \
>>> + ((rc) == -EINPROGRESS)
>>> +#endif
>
>>
>>> +
>>> +int inet_connect_opts(QemuOpts *opts, bool *in_progress, Error **errp)
>>> +{
>>> + struct addrinfo *res, *e;
>>> + int sock = -1;
>>> + bool block = qemu_opt_get_bool(opts, "block", 0);
>>> +
>>> + res = inet_parse_connect_opts(opts, errp);
>>> + if (!res) {
>>> + return -1;
>
> In this error path, in_progress is not assigned, but it's used
> in tcp_start_outgoing_migration()
Took me a minute to see what you mean.
inet_connect_opts() is called by inet_connect(), which is called by
tcp_start_outgoing_migration(), which uses in_progress.
The other callers of inet_connect() and inet_connect_opts() aren't
affected, because they pass null in_progress.
> Let also set the default value of in_progress to 'false' in
> tcp_start_outgoing_migration()
No, let's make sure the functions that take an in_progress argument
always set it. That's easier to use safely.
>>> + }
>>> +
>>
>>> + if (in_progress) {
>>> + *in_progress = false;
>>> }
>>
>> trivial comment:
>>
>> You moved this block to head of inet_connect_addr() in [patch 3/3],
>> why not do this in this patch?
>>
>> I know if *in_progress becomes "true", sock is always >= 0, for loop
>> will exits.
>> But moving this block to inet_connect_addr() is clearer.
Makes inet_connect_addr() always set in_progress, which I like.
[...]
