getpeername returning ENOTCONN for a connected socket

hiren panchasara hiren.panchasara at gmail.com
Sat Jun 21 18:00:09 UTC 2014


On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Sean Bruno <sbruno at ignoranthack.me> wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-06-20 at 16:21 -0700, hiren panchasara wrote:
>> Reviving an old thread where Steve found this problem: A call to
>> getpeername on a connected tcp socket returns ENOTCONN with no prior
>> errors being reported by previous socket calls.
>>
>> Please look at http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2011-January/027647.html
>> for more details.
>>
>> Here is a proposed patch derived from
>> $src/sys/netsmb/smb_trantcp.c:nbssn_recv()'s way of handling a similar
>> situation:
>>
>> Index: sys/kern/uipc_syscalls.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- sys/kern/uipc_syscalls.c    (revision 267693)
>> +++ sys/kern/uipc_syscalls.c    (working copy)
>> @@ -1755,6 +1755,12 @@
>>         if (error != 0)
>>                 return (error);
>>         so = fp->f_data;
>> +       if ((so->so_state & (SS_ISDISCONNECTED|SS_ISDISCONNECTING)) ||
>> +           (so->so_rcv.sb_state & SBS_CANTRCVMORE)) {
>> +               error = ECONNRESET;
>> +               goto done;
>> +       }
>>         if ((so->so_state & (SS_ISCONNECTED|SS_ISCONFIRMING)) == 0) {
>>                 error = ENOTCONN;
>>                 goto done;
>>
>> Does this look correct?
>>
>> cheers,
>> Hiren
>
> Has this been tested in "anger" anywhere?

No. This patch is from code observation after looking at the problem.
I should at least writeup a small module to do local testing as Steve
did in original report. I'll do that and get back.
I'd appreciate if someone can point me to a better way of testing
this. (specially in "anger" ;-))

cheers,
Hiren


More information about the freebsd-net mailing list