From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Cox Subject: Re: bind and O_NONBLOCK Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:35:56 -0400 Message-ID: <20070922173556.GA26346@devserv.devel.redhat.com> References: <46F35DD9.4000909@redhat.com> <20070922161414.GA29637@2ka.mipt.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Ulrich Drepper , netdev , Alan Cox To: Evgeniy Polyakov Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:53632 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757418AbXIVRgI (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Sep 2007 13:36:08 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070922161414.GA29637@2ka.mipt.ru> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Sat, Sep 22, 2007 at 08:14:15PM +0400, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote: > of operations. There are four ways where bind can fail: > > 1. unsufficient rights - nothing can help here > 2. there is no memory - async binding can not help here too, since it > some memory just has to be allocated to save async request > somewhere. > 3. socket is locked. > 4. addres is being bound is in use. For most protocols yes - but not all. For things like IP specifying O_NDELAY is meaningless on a bind it will always complete on the spot as you say