Martin Stjernholm wrote:
>"Stephen R. van den Berg" <<srb[at]cuci.nl>> wrote:
>> Well, I know for a fact that something needs fixing here.
>> The problem is timing related, so it's not easily reproduced.
>> As far as I can remember, the problem involved the socket still having
>> unsent data in it, then being closed, the unsent data already in the kernel
>> buffers of the socket then gets dropped by the kernel instead of still
>> being sent.
>> The problem is a rare occurrence, and it was a pain to actually diagnose it.
>How old is the patch? I've diagnosed and fixed problems like that too
>- disconnect() was sometimes called from the read callback when it
>should be called by the write cb instead. See the comments in
About 5 years old.
Stephen R. van den Berg.
Every successful person has had failures but repeated failure is no
guarantee of eventual success.