netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] [QPOLICY]: Ignore packets with specific priority

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: <20081106152102.GB3621@gerrit.erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Date:	Thu, 6 Nov 2008 16:21:02 +0100
From:	Gerrit Renker <gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>
To:	Tomasz Grobelny <tomasz@...belny.oswiecenia.net>
Cc:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>, dccp@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] [QPOLICY]: Ignore packets with specific priority

| What about using select() call to get the effect of waiting? I think that 
| select() is precisely designed for such a thing. It is generally used on 
| reading from sockets so it could be used on writing to sockets as well. I 
| haven't looked at the code yet to know how complicated it might be to 
| implement but it seems to be a nice idea to consider.
| 
I think select() will give us similar problems - it is this very old BSD socket
interface. 

To me Posix asynchronous I/O seems to be a highly promising idea here, since it is
possible to submit a packet and then have the kernel call you back to confirm
that it has been dispatched.

I don't know the full state of AIO, it recently popped up in a configuration
menu,  http://lse.sourceforge.net/io/aio.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html