[RFC PATCH v5 5/5] server: Replace redundant recv_socket status fields with force_async boolean field.
Zebediah Figura
zfigura at codeweavers.com
Tue Feb 8 20:49:48 CST 2022
This series of patches looks good to me at this point, enough that I
think it's fair to drop the RFC from the title.
I feel like 1-2 are kind of awkward split the way they are—and the fact
that you have to edit an earlier comment shows this. I might recommend
merging those two.
Sorry for the persistent slowness in review—this is a hard patch set,
but I should try to be more prompt regardless.
I just have one more nitpick:
On 2/4/22 14:52, Jinoh Kang wrote:
> - /* recv() returned EWOULDBLOCK, i.e. no data available yet */
> - if (status == STATUS_DEVICE_NOT_READY && !sock->nonblocking)
> + /* Synchronous, *blocking* I/O requested? */
> + if (!req->force_async && !sock->nonblocking)
> {
> /* Set a timeout on the async if necessary.
> *
Note that the subsequent comment about when we set a timeout is pretty
much superfluous now. The client isn't giving us a status anymore, and I
think we don't need the comment anyway—the code is pretty clear now, and
matches the expectation of when timeouts are set.
More information about the wine-devel
mailing list