Timeouts in HEAD ldap code.

[Volker Lendecke]

Hi!

On Tue, May 31, 2005 at 05:18:59PM -0700, Jeremy Allison wrote:

> We need to separate out the read paths for the smb calls, which need
> to be signal safe (using the EINTR ignoring wrapper functions) and

Just to get it straight, trying to understand the requirements: A client
blocks us in a SMB read call, an oplock break or a tdb message comes in, and
we don't respond until the client is so kind to send us enough data? Ok, for
oplocks this makes sense as the client would not respond anyway. But what
about for example MSG_SMB_UNLOCK? What does that do?

> Let's discuss this - and work out who will do the code conversion.

So is the reasonable thing to do to revert to the current 3_0 read_data
implementation, and make read_data_until use the normal interrupting read
system call?

BTW, why do we have read_data and read_socket_data in 3_0? From a glance I did
not see any difference.

Volker
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20050601/a39107bc/attachment.bin