|
From: | Benjamin |
Subject: | Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2] Support for UDP unicast network backend |
Date: | Wed, 30 Nov 2011 02:29:50 +0900 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; OpenBSD i386; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110815 Thunderbird/5.0 |
On 11/28/11 20:39, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Benjamin<address@hidden> wrote:+ fd = qemu_socket(PF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM, 0); + if (fd< 0) { + perror("socket(PF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM)"); + return -1; + } + val = 1; + ret = setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, + (const char *)&val, sizeof(val)); + if (ret< 0) { + perror("setsockopt(SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR)");Please avoid leaking the file descriptor on error: closesocket(fd); Since existing code also does this it may be more appropriate to send a follow-up patch that cleans up all of net/socket.c. Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi<address@hidden> Stefan
I can do that. However is it really a leak considering the fact that the program will call exit just after? If it's a matter of consistency and coding style I would understand though. One more thing, git-format-patch added a "From" field to the header and caused this glitch in the mail. I thought git-send-mail or the mail server would handle it well but apparently not: From 2f5b85fcadcfee3b75a6a21dc86d10b945c99f0f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Benjamin MARSILI <address@hidden> git-am didn't complain with the patch that I sent but it may break aftergmail relayed it (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-11/msg03152.html).
The second from header is interpreted as text... Should I remove the first "From" field before sending the patch? Sorry for the noise on the ML and thanks to all those who helped me get involved. Benjamin
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |