comment out the recv() avoidance logic

diff --git a/src/sbuf.c b/src/sbuf.c
index 40eb41a76c424c27e32ad8f8e5d3a9f6da5ec655..057b5bffcfcde7be50823238b82e8f31047be9e1 100644 (file)
--- a/src/sbuf.c
+++ b/src/sbuf.c
@@ -175,25 +175,23 @@ void sbuf_pause(SBuf *sbuf)
 /* resume from pause, start waiting for data */
 void sbuf_continue(SBuf *sbuf)
 {
-       bool do_recv = true;
+       bool do_recv = DO_RECV;
        AssertActive(sbuf);
 
        sbuf_wait_for_data(sbuf);
 
        /*
-        * FIXME: is it safe?
+        * It's tempting to try to avoid the recv() but that would
+        * only work if no code wants to see full packet.
         *
-        * if avail > SMALL_PKT in buffer, skip the recv().
+        * This is not true in ServerParameter case.
         */
-       if (sbuf->recv_pos - sbuf->pkt_pos >= SMALL_PKT)
-               do_recv = false;
-
        /*
-        * There may be some data already received,
-        * but not certain, so avoid SKIP_RECV.
-        * Anyway, it affects only client sockets.
+        * if (sbuf->recv_pos - sbuf->pkt_pos >= SMALL_PKT)
+        *      do_recv = false;
         */
-       sbuf_main_loop(sbuf, DO_RECV);
+
+       sbuf_main_loop(sbuf, do_recv);
 }
 
 /*