Re: ws2_32: Implement SO_GET_MAX_MSG_SIZE for getsockopt.

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

"Kai Blin"  wrote:
> +static void test_extendedSocketOptions()
> +{
> - WSADATA wsa;
> - SOCKET sock;
> - struct sockaddr_in sa;
> - int sa_len = sizeof(struct sockaddr_in);
> - ULONG optval, optlen = sizeof(ULONG);

Why to use ULONG if what you later cast it to is 'int *', and according to
the docs (and your implementation) SO_MAX_MSG_SIZE expects sizeof(int) for
the optval?

...
> - if(bind(sock, (struct sockaddr *) &sa, (int)sa_len) < 0){

There is not need for a cast, sa_len has the type 'int'.
> -
>    trace("Failed to bind socket: 0x%08x\n", WSAGetLastError());
> -
>    closesocket(sock);
> -
>    WSACleanup();
> -
>    exit(1);

This kills the whole process instead of terminating gracefully just this
particular test.
> - }
> -
> - ret = getsockopt(sock, SOL_SOCKET, SO_MAX_MSG_SIZE, (char *)&optval, (int *)&optlen);

ws2_32: Implement SO_GET_MAX_MSG_SIZE for getsockopt.

[Kai Blin]

On Tuesday 28 November 2006 17:05, Dmitry Timoshkov wrote:
> "Kai Blin"  wrote:
> > +static void test_extendedSocketOptions()
> > +{
> > - WSADATA wsa;
> > - SOCKET sock;
> > - struct sockaddr_in sa;
> > - int sa_len = sizeof(struct sockaddr_in);
> > - ULONG optval, optlen = sizeof(ULONG);
>
> Why to use ULONG if what you later cast it to is 'int *', and according to
> the docs (and your implementation) SO_MAX_MSG_SIZE expects sizeof(int) for
> the optval?

Because another part of the docs says SO_MAX_MSG_SIZE expects ULONG.
> ...
> > - if(bind(sock, (struct sockaddr *) &sa, (int)sa_len) < 0){
>
> There is not need for a cast, sa_len has the type 'int'.

Whoops, copy&paste error from my linux test program, where sa_len was a 
size_t.
> > -
> >    trace("Failed to bind socket: 0x%08x\n", WSAGetLastError());
> > -
> >    closesocket(sock);
> > -
> >    WSACleanup();
> > -
> >    exit(1);
>
> This kills the whole process instead of terminating gracefully just this
> particular test.

Yeah, forgot to convert that from the standalone test I wrote first.
Reading all the code in socket.c must have turned my brain all mushy.

Thanks for catching those. I'll fix it and resubmit. 
Kai