On Wed, May 06, 2026 at 09:06:05AM +0200, Laurent Vivier wrote: > On 5/6/26 07:38, David Gibson wrote: > > On Wed, May 06, 2026 at 01:47:10AM +0200, Stefano Brivio wrote: > > > From: David Gibson > > > > > > Start implementing pesto in earnest. Create a control/configuration > > > socket in passt. Have pesto connect to it and retrieve a server greeting > > > Perform some basic version checking. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: David Gibson > > > [sbrivio: Avoid potential recursive calling between conf_accept() and > > > conf_close(), reported by clang-tidy] > > > > Huh. For some reason that warning didn't trip for me. Although it's > > technically true they can mutually recurse, I believe they're both > > tail calls, so it shouldn't eat the stack. > > > > > [sbrivio: In conf(), check we're not exceeding sizeof(c->control_path) > > > instead of sizeof(c->socket_path), and, in pesto's main(), print > > > argv[optind] instead of argv[1] to indicate an invalid socket path, > > > both reported by Jon Maloy] > > > [sbrivio: In pesto's main(), drop unnecessary newline from error > > > message, reported by Laurent] > > > [sbrivio: Don't use SOCK_NONBLOCK on accept4(), as that only applies > > > to the *new* file descriptor, which we don't want -- set O_NONBLOCK > > > on the listening file descriptor using fcntl()] > > > > Making the new (accepted) socket non-blocking was the intended > > behaviour here. We also want non-blocking for the listening socket, > > but that was already done in feab892c7 ("tap, repair: Use > > SOCK_NONBLOCK and SOCK_CLOEXEC on Unix sockets"). > > This patch has been dropped since v6 of the series. Oh, right. Sorry, I forgot it had been part of this series; thought it was already merged from an earlier series. What was the reason for dropping it? -- David Gibson (he or they) | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you, not the other way | around. http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson