linux-kernel - Re: poll() blocked / packets not received ?

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20081021051252.GS24654@1wt.eu>
Date:	Tue, 21 Oct 2008 07:12:53 +0200
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Nicolas Cannasse <ncannasse@...ion-twin.com>
Cc:	davids@...master.com, swivel@...lls.gnugeneration.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: poll() blocked / packets not received ?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 07:24:14PM +0200, Nicolas Cannasse wrote:
> For (1) I can't add the timeout since I have no way to differentiate 
> between a lost connection and a request that takes time to execute.

Not only you can, but you *must*. Any service assuming infinite timeout
is deemed to fail. If you know that one request can take as long as one
minute for instance, then use a 2 minutes timeout. The day all requests
will be automatically cleaned up because of a failed firewall between
client and server, you'll be happy not to have to come there and restart
the service to flush them.

There's a huge difference between using a very large timeout and none at
all.

Willy

--
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/