[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1271176838.16881.537.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 18:40:38 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.hengli.com.au>,
Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>,
David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@...el.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
qemu-devel <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tun: orphan an skb on tx
Le mardi 13 avril 2010 à 17:36 +0200, Jan Kiszka a écrit :
> Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > The following situation was observed in the field:
> > tap1 sends packets, tap2 does not consume them, as a result
> > tap1 can not be closed.
>
> And before that, tap1 may not be able to send further packets to anyone
> else on the bridge as its TX resources were blocked by tap2 - that's
> what we saw in the field.
>
After the patch, tap1 is able to flood tap2, and tap3/tap4 not able to
send one single frame. Is it OK ?
Back to the problem : tap1 cannot be closed.
Why ? because of refcounts ?
When a socket with inflight tx packets is closed, we dont block the
close, we only delay the socket freeing once all packets were delivered
and freed.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists