Nmap Development mailing list archives
Re: get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock.
From: Henri Doreau <henri.doreau () greenbone net>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:56:03 +0100
Hi Luis, 2011/12/19 Luis MartinGarcia. <luis.mgarc () gmail com>:
nsock_core.c:186: Attempt to FD_SET fd 1024, which is not less than FD_SETSIZE (1024). Try using a lower parallelism. Has anyone experienced this behavior? Is nsock failing to determine the maximum number of descriptors per process? Is it get_max_open_descriptors()'s fault?
This is neither nsock nor netutil's fault. The problem is that select(2) can't deal with more than FD_SETSIZE descriptors. This number is usually set to 1024, regardless your system configuration for resource limits. Removing this select(2)-related limitation was one of my primary aims for writing nsock-engines. Depending on how get_max_open_descriptors() is used it might make sense to make the function return MIN(FD_SETSIZE, <rlimit>). Regards. -- Henri _______________________________________________ Sent through the nmap-dev mailing list http://cgi.insecure.org/mailman/listinfo/nmap-dev Archived at http://seclists.org/nmap-dev/
Current thread:
- get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock. Luis MartinGarcia. (Dec 19)
- Re: get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock. Henri Doreau (Dec 19)
- Re: get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock. Luis MartinGarcia. (Dec 19)
- Re: get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock. Henri Doreau (Dec 19)
- Re: get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock. Luis MartinGarcia. (Dec 19)
- Re: get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock. Henri Doreau (Dec 19)
- Re: get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock. Luis MartinGarcia. (Dec 19)
- Re: get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock. Luis MartinGarcia. (Dec 19)
- Re: get_max_open_descriptors() is more generous than Nsock. Henri Doreau (Dec 19)