On 02/06/2015 10:38 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> Looking again at the code after Andres' interrupt-handling patch series, I
>> got confused by the fact that there are several wait-retry loops in
>> different layers, and reading and writing works slightly differently.
>>
>> I propose the attached, which pulls all the wait-retry logic up to
>> secure_read() and secure_write(). This makes the code a lot more
>> understandable.
>
> Are you sure that it is a good idea to move the check of port->noblock
> out of be_tls_[read|write] to an upper level? ISTM that we should set
> errno and n to respectively EWOULDBLOCK and -1 in be_tls_[write|read]
> when port->noblock and do nothing otherwise. In your patch those
> values are set even if the port is in block mode.
It simplifies the code to do all the sleeping and interrupt handling
code in the upper level, in secure_[read|write]. Do you see a problem
with it?
- Heikki