linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/5] [RFC] AF_RXRPC socket family implementation [try #2]

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20070318142315.6f881ec8@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Date:	Sun, 18 Mar 2007 14:23:15 +0000
From:	Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
To:	Kyle Moffett <mrmacman_g4@....com>
Cc:	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, herbert.xu@...hat.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org,
	arjan@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] [RFC] AF_RXRPC socket family implementation [try
 #2]

> IMHO the problem with classifying RxRPC as a "reliable datagram"  
> socket is that even an atomic unidirectional communication isn't a  
> single datagram, it's at least 3; there is shared connection state  

Thats fine. Any *reliable* protocol sends more than one packet per
message you send. RDM is for reliable messages

> independent and possibly simultaneous RxRPC calls.  From the digging  
> around that I did in the kernel socket code a while ago I don't see a  
> cleaner way of implementing it than a new SOCK_RXRPC.

I disagree entirely. I've still seen no evidence you need a new type for
this. What does AIX do  out of interest ?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/