Hi
On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 10:52 PM Jens Freimann <address@hidden> wrote:
From: Jens Freimann <address@hidden>
End processing of messages when VHOST_USER_NONE
is received.
Without this we run into a vubr_panic() call and get
"PANIC: Unhandled request: 0"
Signed-off-by: Jens Freimann <address@hidden>
---
contrib/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/contrib/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c
b/contrib/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c
index 9efb9dac0e..35fa0c5e56 100644
--- a/contrib/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c
+++ b/contrib/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c
@@ -161,7 +161,7 @@ vu_message_read(VuDev *dev, int conn_fd, VhostUserMsg *vmsg)
rc = recvmsg(conn_fd, &msg, 0);
} while (rc < 0 && (errno == EINTR || errno == EAGAIN));
- if (rc <= 0) {
+ if (rc < 0) {
vu_panic(dev, "Error while recvmsg: %s", strerror(errno));
return false;
}
@@ -806,6 +806,8 @@ vu_process_message(VuDev *dev, VhostUserMsg *vmsg)
return vu_get_queue_num_exec(dev, vmsg);
case VHOST_USER_SET_VRING_ENABLE:
return vu_set_vring_enable_exec(dev, vmsg);
+ case VHOST_USER_NONE:
+ break;
I am afraid this isn't working. vu_message_read() returns
true/success, vu_process_message() returns false/no-reply, so
vu_dispatch() will return success, and the caller has no clear way to
know that the socket got disconnected. For me the vu_panic() was quite
more appropriate here.
What problem did this patch exactly solve?