From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <reyuki@gnuweeb.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on
	server-vie001.gnuweeb.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS,
	URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.6
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gnuweeb.org;
	s=new2025; t=1754013124;
	bh=bheSj1Q8bjc3DiiqwVrnalo1madEyPO5WUL91m0D+w8=;
	h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject:
	 To:Cc:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID:Date:From:
	 Reply-To:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Resent-Date:
	 Resent-From:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:User-Agent:Content-Type:
	 Content-Transfer-Encoding;
	b=ZG43ohSuR3Emg0UG38kxjpoVgGb4AeuU1jrryLTiHTC5v6UbJEttnu8EAZ5+vkjIg
	 bxJVOzph4+I4MiR31y31ORgvVg/e9FoEqwbzAwsA+G+raTE4VQPOHLcRaXozF/BQa4
	 WlSSLsv6VsL6ndKudP1YX1V0L3f9vLfhWm7e+tSWCP1rjnhcoewndzLbMb73VA4CcC
	 g9tYwmn49F8knK/4AgfKv/kCbFreS6AgOlkUTawIkXh17lUYcSB4Qvns9Lj3xmSq2E
	 YJpbIjywmO64nKHBhoC0XDIlZ57d4PTeJi64/oQ7L0BTQxIL+pMK0OyAlVYYWjpmds
	 OVmWFBIDapY7A==
Received: from mail-lf1-f49.google.com (mail-lf1-f49.google.com [209.85.167.49])
	by server-vie001.gnuweeb.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D9E823126F06
	for <gwml@vger.gnuweeb.org>; Fri,  1 Aug 2025 01:52:04 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lf1-f49.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-55b8a7a505cso507700e87.0
        for <gwml@vger.gnuweeb.org>; Thu, 31 Jul 2025 18:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUww7KwcXQog4o6Y+DOe4YeFdO9wt+W4ro5JyC6hiMoBB9L4zbOnybh6vtJY3E7ZdDTNY5O@vger.gnuweeb.org
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyn9zL0BZf74FrhivW2bCYJfG8pf97GeB98XrvL75ckpR+lL8+Y
	mtvwCwBYP566YCQmxdpSTt/qjbkpW/IQT0OO++9KAgxUVHN7Fbe4+iGdUSOfqOaMJt6jL/HnqAc
	e+A0ENWzAqOFtlBfbtQBhbY6jjUziQ2Q=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEZ0EKFW2d4S4aZqYTEMa7XbJd++ym6k56VBxg297wxUyGhPpqSaF30Lp2qLOZoPn+6MaIR3fvFINMhRsIeZ7k=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3b94:b0:553:2a0f:d3d4 with SMTP id
 2adb3069b0e04-55b7c08a076mr3045263e87.49.1754013124300; Thu, 31 Jul 2025
 18:52:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20250731030856.366368-1-reyuki@gnuweeb.org> <20250731030856.366368-4-reyuki@gnuweeb.org>
 <CAOG64qMZgRUp4i1vY2U0evdobMr4eo_E7imhrCwhPgB9Yg9+Hg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOG64qMZgRUp4i1vY2U0evdobMr4eo_E7imhrCwhPgB9Yg9+Hg@mail.gmail.com>
From: reyuki <reyuki@gnuweeb.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2025 08:51:52 +0700
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAADvAgr_gK5Pqgs7-Q4BG_9JbzyFjZn0pT_G89aHDzPnCB6x9Q@mail.gmail.com>
X-Gm-Features: Ac12FXwJvUbQEkak9IRDUQQmOpAfSvHKgu56CmsmaBYeonKkHGbcgUMJz_pq8i4
Message-ID: <CAADvAgr_gK5Pqgs7-Q4BG_9JbzyFjZn0pT_G89aHDzPnCB6x9Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH gwproxy v1 3/3] dnslookup: Initial work for implementation
 of C-ares-like getaddrinfo function
To: Alviro Iskandar Setiawan <alviro.iskandar@gnuweeb.org>
Cc: Ammar Faizi <ammarfaizi2@gnuweeb.org>, "GNU/Weeb Mailing List" <gwml@vger.gnuweeb.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: <gwml.vger.gnuweeb.org>

On Fri, Aug 1, 2025 at 2:15=E2=80=AFAM Alviro Iskandar Setiawan wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 10:09=E2=80=AFAM Ahmad Gani wrote:
> > +static int resolve_name(int sockfd, const char *name, uint16_t type, u=
int16_t nport,
> > +       struct gw_ares_addrinfo *result, struct gw_addrinfo_node **tail=
)
> > +{
> > +       uint8_t send_buff[UDP_MSG_LIMIT];
> > +       uint8_t recv_buff[UDP_MSG_LIMIT];
> > +       gwdns_query_pkt *query_pkt;
> > +       gwdns_answ_data raw_answ;
> > +       gwdns_question_part q;
> > +       ssize_t buff_len;
> > +       int ret;
> > [...]
> > +attempt_retry:
> > +       ret =3D __sys_send(sockfd, send_buff, buff_len, MSG_NOSIGNAL);
> > +       if (ret < 0) {
> > +               ret =3D GW_ARES_INTERNAL_ERR;
> > +               return ret;
> > +       }
> > +
> > +       if (ret !=3D buff_len)
> > +               goto attempt_retry;
>
> Why is this attempt_retry needed?

Oh, do you mean short send is not possible in blocking socket? Sorry for
the confusion, I think I'm not aware of that fact. I will remove it.