[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1289578532.3185.265.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 17:15:32 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
Cc: Hua Zhong <hzhong@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, pekkas@...core.fi, jmorris@...ei.org,
yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net, paul.moore@...com
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH] network: return errors if we know tcp_connect
failed
Le vendredi 12 novembre 2010 à 11:08 -0500, Eric Paris a écrit :
> 2) What should the generic TCP code (tcp_connect()) do if the skb failed
> to send. Should it return error codes back up the stack somehow or
> should they continue to be ignored? Obviously continuing to just ignore
> information we have doesn't make me happy (otherwise I wouldn't have
> started scratching this itch). But the point about ENOBUFS is well
> taken. Maybe I should make tcp_connect(), or the caller to
> tcp_connect() more intelligent about specific error codes?
>
> I'm looking for a path forward. If SELinux is rejecting the SYN packets
> on connect() I want to pass that info to userspace rather than just
> hanging. What's the best way to accomplish that?
>
Eric, if you can differentiate a permanent reject, instead of a
temporary one (congestion, or rate limiting, or ENOBUF, or ...), then
yes, you could make tcp_connect() report to user the permanent error,
and ignore the temporary one.
--
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