From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45390) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VGNTV-000096-Ej for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Sep 2013 02:19:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VGNTQ-0000IN-KH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 02 Sep 2013 02:18:57 -0400 Message-ID: <52242DBB.7010509@siemens.com> Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 08:18:35 +0200 From: Jan Kiszka MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1376594735-7433-1-git-send-email-tmirza@codesourcery.com> <52207C25.9070302@siemens.com> <52236146.3050801@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <52236791.9000900@weilnetz.de> In-Reply-To: <52236791.9000900@weilnetz.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [Qemu-trivial] [PATCH v3] slirp: Port redirection option behave differently on Linux and Windows List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Stefan Weil Cc: qemu-trivial@nongnu.org, Taimoor Mirza , Michael Tokarev , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 2013-09-01 18:13, Stefan Weil wrote: > Am 01.09.2013 17:46, schrieb Michael Tokarev: >> 30.08.2013 15:04, Jan Kiszka wrote: >>> On 2013-08-15 21:25, Taimoor wrote: >>>> From: Taimoor Mirza >>>> >>>> port redirection code uses SO_REUSEADDR socket option before binding to >>>> host port. Behavior of SO_REUSEADDR is different on Windows and Linux. >>>> Relaunching QEMU with same host and guest port redirection values on >>>> Linux >>>> throws error but on Windows it does not throw any error. >>>> Problem is discussed in >>>> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2013-04/msg03089.html >> [] >>> Stefan, can you ack this? Then I would pick it up for the slirp queue. >> >> I remember having exactly the same issue myself a few years back with >> the difference of SO_REUSEADDR behavour on windows and *nix, and the >> suggested change appears to be correct. So you can count on my >> >> Reviewed-by: Michael Tokarev >> >> as well. >> >> I applied the v2 of this patch (with a trivial fix) to trivial queue >> (before seeing this v3), I can remove it if you like. >> >> Thanks, >> >> /mjt > > Hi Michael, > > thanks for your review of this patch. I had no opportunity to test > it myself, but I also think that it is fine. > > (v2 + trivial fix) should be identical to v3, so this looks good, too. Yep, fine with me as well. Thanks, everyone. Jan -- Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RTC ITP SES-DE Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux