lwIP - A Lightweight TCP/IP stack - Bugs: bug #45109, recv() with flags=MSG_PEEK...
You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.
bug #45109: recv() with flags=MSG_PEEK consumes data
Submitter: | Christopher Pow <cpow> | ||
Submitted: | Fri 15 May 2015 01:16:54 PM UTC | ||
Votes: | 50 | ||
Category: | sockets/netconn | Severity: | 3 - Normal |
Item Group: | Faulty Behaviour | Status: | Works For Me |
Privacy: | Public | Assigned to: | goldsimon |
Open/Closed: | Closed | Planned Release: | None |
lwIP version: | git head |
Jump to the original submission
Sat 05 Mar 2016 10:23:08 AM UTC, comment #14: |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 30 Sep 2015 07:17:45 PM UTC, comment #13:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Wed 30 Sep 2015 01:32:16 PM UTC, comment #12: We don't have MSG_PEEK defined anywhere else in our source base.
|
Christopher Pow <cpow> |
Wed 30 Sep 2015 11:38:00 AM UTC, comment #11:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 29 Sep 2015 06:28:53 PM UTC, comment #10: Indeed. MSG_* bit value are system-specific. You have to ensure only lwIP includes are used. |
Sylvain Rochet <gradator> |
Tue 29 Sep 2015 06:06:53 PM UTC, comment #9: The issue turns out to be the value of MSG_PEEK is different in bits/socket.h vs lwip/sockets.h. |
Mohan Mangalaraj <mohans> |
Tue 29 Sep 2015 09:10:46 AM UTC, comment #8: Or not… now that I remember I understood the question this way: "Is #45827 fixing my problem ? Do you have the patch for #45827 ?". I only answered the second part. |
Sylvain Rochet <gradator> |
Tue 29 Sep 2015 08:57:56 AM UTC, comment #7: Indeed, that was for #45827, sorry :-) |
Sylvain Rochet <gradator> |
Tue 29 Sep 2015 08:51:36 AM UTC, comment #6:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 29 Sep 2015 08:41:22 AM UTC, comment #5: I guess it is commit 204bd29e52. |
Sylvain Rochet <gradator> |
Tue 29 Sep 2015 12:04:56 AM UTC, comment #4:
|
Mohan Mangalaraj <mohans> |
Thu 10 Sep 2015 07:06:41 PM UTC, comment #3: Christopher, do you have any input on this? Any hint on how to trigger the misbehaviour? |
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Tue 25 Aug 2015 08:25:15 PM UTC, comment #2:
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Mon 18 May 2015 07:21:02 PM UTC, comment #1: Seems like this got broken back in 2008 when fixing bug #25051, which seemed to just drop the fact that PEEK means data should not be marked as received.
|
Simon Goldschmidt <goldsimon> |
Fri 15 May 2015 01:16:54 PM UTC, original submission:
I have a user report that suggests the implementation of MSG_PEEK is not quite correct.
|
Christopher Pow <cpow> |
No files currently attached
Depends on the following items: None found
Items that depend on this one: None found
There are 50 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.
Follow 7 latest changes.
Date | Changed by | Updated Field | Previous Value | => | Replaced by |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2016-03-05 | goldsimon | Assigned to | None | goldsimon | |
Open/Closed | Open | Closed | |||
2015-08-25 | goldsimon | Status | Confirmed | Works For Me | |
Planned Release | 1.5.0 | ||||
2015-08-19 | goldsimon | Planned Release | 1.5.0 | ||
2015-05-27 | landersson | Carbon-Copy | - | Added landersson | |
2015-05-18 | goldsimon | Status | None | Confirmed |
Powered by Savane 3.13-d3ae.
Corresponding source code
No response. Works for me. I'll reopen it if we get more input to see if there is really a bug.