Re: Question about socket timeouts

On Monday, August 19, 2013 11:13:02 pm Daniel Eischen wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Aug 2013, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> 
> > Yes! Please file a PR!
> 
> This sorta implies that both are acceptable (although,
> the Linux behavior seems more desirable).
> 
>    http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=369

No, that says "round up", so it does mean that the requested timeout
should be the minimum amount slept.  tvtohz() does this.  Really odd
that the socket code is using its own version of this rather than
tvtohz().

Oh, I bet this just predates tvtohz().  Interesting that it keeps getting
bug fixes in its history that simply using tvtohz() would have solved.

Try this:

Index: uipc_socket.c
===================================================================
--- uipc_socket.c	(revision 254570)
+++ uipc_socket.c	(working copy)
_at__at_ -2699,21 +2699,16 _at__at_ sosetopt(struct socket *so, struct sockopt *sopt)
 			if (error)
 				goto bad;
 
-			/* assert(hz > 0); */
 			if (tv.tv_sec < 0 || tv.tv_sec > INT_MAX / hz ||
 			    tv.tv_usec < 0 || tv.tv_usec >= 1000000) {
 				error = EDOM;
 				goto bad;
 			}
-			/* assert(tick > 0); */
-			/* assert(ULONG_MAX - INT_MAX >= 1000000); */
-			val = (u_long)(tv.tv_sec * hz) + tv.tv_usec / tick;
-			if (val > INT_MAX) {
+			val = tvtohz(&tv);
+			if (val == INT_MAX) {
 				error = EDOM;
 				goto bad;
 			}
-			if (val == 0 && tv.tv_usec != 0)
-				val = 1;
 
 			switch (sopt->sopt_name) {
 			case SO_SNDTIMEO:


-- 
John Baldwin