On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 17:40 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:

Peter Zijlstra wrote:

quoted

On Sat, 2007-02-24 at 17:17 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:

quoted

I don't really see why
queueing is special though, dropping the packets in the ruleset
will break things just as well, as will routing them to a blackhole.
I guess the user just needs to be smart enough not to do this.

Its user-space and no emergency packet may rely on user-space because it
most likely is needed to maintain user-space.

I believe I might have misunderstood the intention of this patch.

Assuming the user is smart enough not to queue packets destined
to a SOCK_VMIO socket, are you worried about unrelated packets
allocated from the emergency reserve not getting freed fast
enough because they're sitting in a queue? In that case simply
dropping the packets would be fine I guess.

OK, that sounds good. I shall make NF_QUEUE a black hole for emergency
packets.

Alas, that leaves no way to warn a user about a SOCK_VMIO bound packet
treated this way, since, as you said, that is unknown at this point in
the chain.

Thanks,
Peter