From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: "Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón" <carenas@gmail•com>
Cc: phillip.wood@dunelm•org.uk, git@vger•kernel.org,
yoshfuji@linux-ipv6•org, kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail•com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] daemon: correctly handle soft accept() errors in service_loop
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 16:53:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqy0tc68s4.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <vgailqqh3bcip3gxtdffoo4ey7xjso4xerewxncy22shrzn4k2@25hst4sfgxq4> ("Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón"'s message of "Fri, 27 Jun 2025 16:05:52 -0700")
Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón <carenas@gmail•com> writes:
>> socklen_t sslen = sizeof(ss);
>> - int incoming = accept(pfd[i].fd, &ss.sa, &sslen);
>> + int incoming;
>> + int retry = 3;
>> +
>> + incoming = accept(pfd[i].fd, &ss.sa, &sslen);
>> if (incoming < 0) {
>> ...
>
> That seems unnecessarily restrictive just to minimize churn and leaves the
> deflaration of incoming strangely sitting in between two assignments, which
> while it doesn't trigger -Wdeclaration-after-statement seems to go against
> its spirit.
Hmph, I am not Phillip, but my take on it is that incoming and retry
are fairly closely related variables in this loop, and better
grouped together?
I also find it a bit ugly to hardcode "3" here like this, but
perhaps I am overthinking about it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-27 23:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-26 16:10 [PATCH] daemon: correctly handle soft accept() errors Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
2025-06-26 16:15 ` Kristoffer Haugsbakk
2025-06-26 17:21 ` [PATCH v2] daemon: correctly handle soft accept() errors in service_loop Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
2025-06-27 8:38 ` Phillip Wood
2025-06-27 19:05 ` Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
2025-06-27 20:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-06-27 23:05 ` Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
2025-06-27 23:25 ` Hridoy Ahmed
2025-06-27 23:53 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2025-06-30 8:59 ` Phillip Wood
2025-06-27 23:14 ` [PATCH v3] " Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belón
2025-06-30 9:00 ` Phillip Wood
2025-06-30 15:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-07-01 19:33 ` Phillip Wood
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqy0tc68s4.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
--cc=carenas@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
--cc=kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=phillip.wood@dunelm$(echo .)org.uk \
--cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox