[or-cvs] r13658: Answer the next-to-last XXX020rc item. (in tor/trunk: . src/or)

[nickm@xxxxxxxx]

Author: nickm
Date: 2008-02-21 11:12:01 -0500 (Thu, 21 Feb 2008)
New Revision: 13658

Modified:
   tor/trunk/
   tor/trunk/src/or/connection.c
Log:
 r14363@31-33-219:  nickm | 2008-02-21 11:11:33 -0500
 Answer the next-to-last XXX020rc item.



Property changes on: tor/trunk
___________________________________________________________________
 svk:merge ticket from /tor/trunk [r14363] on 49666b30-7950-49c5-bedf-9dc8f3168102

Modified: tor/trunk/src/or/connection.c
===================================================================
--- tor/trunk/src/or/connection.c	2008-02-21 16:11:58 UTC (rev 13657)
+++ tor/trunk/src/or/connection.c	2008-02-21 16:12:01 UTC (rev 13658)
@@ -1860,9 +1860,16 @@
     /* The other side's handle_write will never actually get called, so
      * we need to invoke the appropriate callbacks ourself. */
     connection_t *linked = conn->linked_conn;
-    /* XXXX020rc Do we need to ensure that this stuff is called even if
+    /* XXXX020 Do we need to ensure that this stuff is called even if
      * conn dies in a way that causes us to return -1 earlier? -NM
      * No idea. -RD */
+    /* Actually, I'm pretty sure not.  The big things here are to
+     * tell the linked connection, "yes, you wrote some stuff!" so that
+     * it can succeed as a appropriate.  But if this side of the link
+     * returned -1, then it couldn't process the data it got.  That's
+     * fairly rare, and doesn't really count as "success" for the other
+     * side. -NM
+     */
 
     if (n_read) {
       /* Probably a no-op, but hey. */