Closed Bug 17806 Opened 26 years ago Closed 25 years ago

The value of the out_flags fields when PR_Poll returns 0 or -1

Categories

(NSPR :: NSPR, defect, P3)

Tracking

(Not tracked)

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: wtc, Assigned: wtc)

Details

The value of the out_flags fields of PRPollDesc structures is meaningful only when PR_Poll succeeds (returning a positive number). When PR_Poll returns -1 (error) or 0 (timeout), the out_flags fields must not be examined. There are two problems that need to be fixed. 1. Documentation: the above behavior is not clearly documented. NSPR doc says: On return, the out_flags field of the PRPollDesc data structure is set to indicate what kind of I/O is ready on the respective descriptor. The comments in prio.h say: Upon return from this call PRPollDesc.out_flags will be set to indicate what kind of i/o can be performed on the respective descriptor. We should change "On return" to "On successful return" and add "if PR_Poll returns 0 or -1, the out_flags fields do not contain meaningful values and should not be examined". 2. Implementation: the current implementation of PR_Poll uses the out_flags fields as temporary variables. When PR_Poll returns 0 or -1, it does not reset the out_flags fields to 0. While the caller should not examine the out_flags fields in this case, as defensive programming we should zero the out_flags fields.
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Target Milestone: --- → 4.1
I fixed the comments for PR_Poll in prio.h and the documentation for PR_Poll to say that the out_flags fields must not be used if PR_Poll returns 0 or -1. /cvsroot/mozilla/nsprpub/pr/include/prio.h, revisions 3.26 and 3.27 /cvsroot/mozilla-org/html/docs/refList/refNSPR/priofnc.html, revision 1.4 I decided to not change the implementation of PR_Poll. I think the advantage to be gained is small and it may promote incorrect programming. Callers of PR_Poll should only check the out_flags fields on successful return as documented. Marked the bug fixed.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 25 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.