netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/8] networking/fanotify: declare fanotify socket numbers

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: <20090914001759.GB30621@shareable.org>
Date:	Mon, 14 Sep 2009 01:17:59 +0100
From:	Jamie Lokier <jamie@...reable.org>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
Cc:	Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	alan@...ux.intel.com, hch@...radead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] networking/fanotify: declare fanotify socket numbers

Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 05:51:42PM -0400, Eric Paris (eparis@...hat.com) wrote:
> > For some things yes, some things no.  I'd have to understand where loss
> > can happen to know if it's feasible.  If I know loss happens in the
> > sender context that's great.  If it's somewhere in the middle and the
> > sender doesn't immediately know it'll never be delivered, yes, I don't
> > think it can solve all my needs.  How many places can and skb get lost
> > between the sender and the receiver?
> 
> When queue is full or you do not have enough RAM. Both are reported at
> 'sending' time.

Can you ->poll() and wait reliably until the queue will accept an skb?
(A few spurious EAGAINs/ENOBUFs is ok, as long as it's not the norm).

-- Jamie
--
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