From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50648) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHEHb-0005Kq-OU for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 10:42:16 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHEHW-00059x-PE for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 10:42:11 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f46.google.com ([209.85.215.46]:34447) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VHEHW-00059q-It for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 10:42:06 -0400 Received: by mail-la0-f46.google.com with SMTP id eh20so377912lab.5 for ; Wed, 04 Sep 2013 07:42:05 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <52274357.6010509@redhat.com> References: <1378304540-1431-1-git-send-email-ottlik@fzi.de> <52274357.6010509@redhat.com> From: Peter Maydell Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 15:41:45 +0100 Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC] Do not set SO_REUSEADDR on Windows List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Jan Kiszka , Sebastian Ottlik , Anthony Liguori , Stefan Hajnoczi , QEMU Developers On 4 September 2013 15:27, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 04/09/2013 16:22, Sebastian Ottlik ha scritto: >> This patchset disabels all use of SO_REUSEADDR on Windows. On Windows systems >> the default behavior is equivalent to SO_REUSEADDR on other operating >> systems. SO_REUSEADDR can still be set but results in undesired bahvior >> instead. It may even lead to situations were system behavior is >> unspecified. More information on this can be found at: >> http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms740621.aspx Yep. The issue's come up before: https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2011-03/msg01794.html but I guess nobody ever got round to writing the patch. > Can you make a different patch that introduces a new function > qemu_set_reuseaddr is include/qemu/sockets.h & util/oslib-*, and makes > it a stub for Windows? Yes please, and include a comment in the Windows stub explaining why it does nothing (with the links to MSDN docs) because otherwise it's pretty unobvious and an invitation for somebody to incorrectly reinstate the brokenness. -- PMM