[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B7F993C.9000007@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:11:40 +0800
From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Developers <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v5 0/3] net: reserve ports for applications using
fixed port numbers
Octavian Purdila wrote:
> This patch introduces /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_local_reserved_ports which
> allows users to reserve ports for third-party applications.
>
> The reserved ports will not be used by automatic port assignments
> (e.g. when calling connect() or bind() with port number 0). Explicit
> port allocation behavior is unchanged.
>
> Changes from the previous version:
> - switch the /proc entry format to coma separated list of range ports
> - treat -EFAULT just like any other error and acknowledge written values
> - use isdigit() in proc_get_ulong
>
> Octavian Purdila (3):
> sysctl: refactor integer handling proc code
> sysctl: add proc_do_large_bitmap
> net: reserve ports for applications using fixed port numbers
Hi,
This version looks fine for me, but I need to give them a test, and
I will put feedbacks asap. Thanks for your work!
Still two things:
1) bitops are always atomic on every arch, right? If yes, then ok.
2) I hope you could add some documentation to show the relations
between ip_local_port_range and ip_local_reserved_ports.
Thanks!
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists