Re: psql client does not handle WSAEWOULDBLOCK on Windows

Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>

From: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
To: Ning <ning94803@gmail.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Date: 2024-12-10T06:41:02Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Aug 06, 2024 at 04:01:42PM +0800, Ning wrote:
> In the function of gss_read() if print the value of errno and SOCK_ERRNO
> separately, I found the values are different:
>  *ret = pqsecure_raw_read(conn, recv_buffer, length);
> if (*ret < 0)
> {
> printf("errno: %d\n", errno);
> printf("result_errno: %d\n", SOCK_ERRNO);
> ...

     *ret = pqsecure_raw_read(conn, recv_buffer, length);
     if (*ret < 0)
     {
-        if (errno == EAGAIN || errno == EWOULDBLOCK || errno == EINTR)
+        if (SOCK_ERRNO == EAGAIN || SOCK_ERRNO == EWOULDBLOCK || SOCK_ERRNO == EINTR)

This is going to require some platform-specific check that I don't
have with me, though I am ready to accept that what you are telling
here is true and that we should apply this macro.  Could somebody
check that a bit more in depth?  Andrew D. perhaps?

One thing that I don't understand is why does this only apply after
the first call of pqsecure_raw_read() in gss_read()?  There is a
second call of pqsecure_raw_read() you are not covering but it would
surely need the same treatment, no?

Also, what about pqsecure_raw_write() in pqsecure_open_gss()?
Shouldn't the same check apply?
--
Michael

Commits

  1. Use SOCK_ERRNO[_SET] in fe-secure-gssapi.c.