Re: [PATCH] Improve behaviour of Netlink Sockets

On Sun, Sep 19, 2004 at 10:50:25PM +0200, Pablo Neira wrote:

yes, you are totally right, but as I told you before, I'm not focusing 
my efforts in improving netlink sockets for tools like iproute, for 
those MSG_DONTWAIT is fairly ok.

No I'm talking not about iproute, I'm talking the kernel callers of
unicast/broadcast.  They never wait.
 

I don't agree, enlarging the queue size for applications that send a lot 
of information in a short period of time is just a workaround.

Workaround for what? Please define your problem.

Your original message mentioned a dead-lock, which is now obviously
non-existant.

Herbert, I don't agree, my patch isn't related to stuff that you've 
mentioned. It's fairly true that most ?of application use socket timeout 
0, but my patch is not for those! :-) well, still disagree?

Please reread my messages.  I'm not talking about user-space applications
setting timeout to 0.  Most of them don't.

I'm talking about every single kernel netlink sender.  They never wait.

Cheers,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} [off-list ref]
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt