Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!rex!uflorida!otter.cis.ufl.edu!leh
From: leh@otter.cis.ufl.edu (Les Hill)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.programmer
Subject: Question on AbortIO() and WaitIO()
Message-ID: <28630@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU>
Date: 20 May 91 20:05:06 GMT
Sender: news@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU
Reply-To: leh@otter.cis.ufl.edu (Les Hill)
Organization: U of Florida. Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 36

I have run into a situation which is not clearly documented (to me anyways) in the
RKM's (v1.2 ?).  Below I have included the relevant fragments of code:
...
   struct MsgPort *read_port, *write_port;
   struct IOExtSer *read_req, *write_req;
...
   BYTE dev_error;
   struct Message *read_msg;
...
   /* Clean up */
   if (!CheckIO(read_req)) {
      AbortIO(read_req);
      if (dev_error = WaitIO(read_req)) {
         printf("Error waiting for aborted read -- %d\n", dev_error);
         goto cleanup_8;
      }
      read_msg = GetMsg(read_port); // not necessary?
   }
...

The situation is this: a CMD_READ request *should* be queued at the device
(the CheckIO() should confirm this), the CMD_READ request is then aborted and
a WaitIO() follows as recommended in the RKMs; the WaitIO() returns a -2
(aborted request.)

The question that comes to mind is: does WaitIO() dequeue the reply at read_port (read_port is the reply port for read_req) regardless of the error?
Additionally, do I need the GetMsg()?

Thanks in advance,

Les
-- 
Extraordinary crimes against the people and the state have to be avenged by
agents extraordinary.  Two such people are John Steed -- top professional, and
his partner, Emma Peel -- talented amateur; otherwise known as "The Avengers."
INTERNET: leh@ufl.edu  UUCP: ...!gatech!uflorida!leh  BITNET: vishnu@UFPINE