|
Message-ID: <CAMKF1sp55sDfqmTwY3Vih6JzTDTYMJ1iYeo1Hz-+2vjoBQepFQ@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 07:54:26 -0700 From: Khem Raj <raj.khem@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] bits/socket.h: Define SO_RCVBUFFORCE for mips On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 7:29 AM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 06:43:52PM -0700, Khem Raj wrote: >> packages like udev are using it >> >> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@...il.com> >> >> Upstream-Status: Pending >> --- >> arch/mips/bits/socket.h | 1 + >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/mips/bits/socket.h b/arch/mips/bits/socket.h >> index ba79045..2264679 100644 >> --- a/arch/mips/bits/socket.h >> +++ b/arch/mips/bits/socket.h >> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ struct cmsghdr >> #define SO_RCVBUF 0x1002 >> #define SO_KEEPALIVE 8 >> #define SO_OOBINLINE 256 >> +#define SO_RCVBUFFORCE 33 >> >> #define SO_NO_CHECK 11 >> #define SO_PRIORITY 12 >> -- >> 1.7.10.4 > > I think this is correct, but are there additional new SO_*'s that > should be added to mips, or is this value the same as on other archs > and perhaps not something that should be arch-specific to begin with? I think redefining them in mips specific sockets.h is not needed. it could use the values from sys/socket.h > > Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.