Re: [PATCH v2] daemon: correctly handle soft accept() errors in service_loop
- From
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón <carenas@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 27, 2025, 19:05 UTC
- Message-ID
- <u4scxaxivz62fsljo7okkfdvcle3zdby6h2sdzd6ed5n6wi5xb@5ekxdycixwxe>
- In-Reply-To
- <08804dbe-56dd-4c0e-b36b-a82768b0aa29@gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 09:38:47AM -0800, Phillip Wood wrote:
Show 21 quoted lines
>
> On 26/06/2025 18:21, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón wrote:
> >
> > diff --git a/daemon.c b/daemon.c
> > index d1be61fd57..f113839781 100644
> > --- a/daemon.c
> > +++ b/daemon.c
> > @@ -1145,6 +1145,7 @@ static int service_loop(struct socketlist *socklist)
> > for (size_t i = 0; i < socklist->nr; i++) {
> > if (pfd[i].revents & POLLIN) {
> > + int incoming;
> > union {
> > struct sockaddr sa;
> > struct sockaddr_in sai;
> > @@ -1153,11 +1154,19 @@ static int service_loop(struct socketlist *socklist)
> > #endif
> > } ss;
> > socklen_t sslen = sizeof(ss);
> > - int incoming = accept(pfd[i].fd, &ss.sa, &sslen);
>
> Why is the declaration of incoming moved but retry is declared here?Separating the declaration and assignment for incoming is needed so we can insert a label for goto; moving it up just removes distractions so the rest of the logic is clearly in view.
Obviously that includes the definition and assignment for retry.
How would you suggest to arrange this better?
Carlo