Could you write a code fragment demonstrating pycurl returning
incorrect value for a timeout? I would like to add a test case with
this patch to ensure it does not regress.

Oleg

On Thu, 18 Apr 2013 21:52:09 +0400
Yuri Ushakov <yuri.ushakov_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> I tested the patch by running the patched version under the bigger
> software I'm using and my own debugging statements in pycurl and
> tornado. So there're no unit tests for the bug, sorry. As to the bug
> report, since I couldn't find an issue tracker for pycurl, I posted
> all relevant info on this list.
>
>
> On 18 April 2013 20:37, Oleg Pudeyev <oleg+pycurl_at_bsdpower.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for the patch.
> >
> > Is there a bug report or code to reproduce the bug?
> >
> > Oleg
> >
> > On Thu, 4 Apr 2013 15:40:24 +0400
> > Yuri Ushakov <yuri.ushakov_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8792466/pycurl.c.patch
> > >
> > > When really big timeouts were specified, do_multi_timeout() would
> > > return negative values to Python code. Libcurl takes long and
> > > handles it well, whereas pycurl corrupted the value.
> > >
> > > That made tornado (http://www.tornadoweb.org) go into an
> > > essentially infinite loop and stop serving incoming http
> > > requests, eating up all CPU time.
> > >
> > > Tested on Python 2.6.5 and Tornado 2.0.0.
> >
> >

_______________________________________________
http://cool.haxx.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/curl-and-python
Received on 2013-04-18