netdev - Re: [PATCH 03/21] RDS: Congestion-handling code

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: <c0a09e5c0901271110v196930f1i26bdd0d00403fd76@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 27 Jan 2009 11:10:49 -0800
From:	Andrew Grover <andy.grover@...il.com>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
Cc:	Andy Grover <andy.grover@...cle.com>, rdreier@...co.com,
	rds-devel@....oracle.com, general@...ts.openfabrics.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/21] RDS: Congestion-handling code

On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 5:10 AM, Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 26, 2009 at 06:17:40PM -0800, Andy Grover (andy.grover@...cle.com) wrote:
>> +/*
>> + * Yes, a global lock.  It's used so infrequently that it's worth keeping it
>> + * global to simplify the locking.  It's only used in the following
>> + * circumstances:
>> + *
>> + *  - on connection buildup to associate a conn with its maps
>
> Is this a rare condition? Is this protocol only intended for the
> long-living connections and is not suitable for the cases when lots of
> them are created and teared down quickly?

Connections are long-lived. Imagine a cluster. RDS multiplexes all
sockets' datagrams between 2 hosts over a single transport-layer
connection, so if a node sends ONE datagram to another, an IB
connection is set up and sticks around indefinitely.

Regards -- Andy
--
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