[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4BA22463.6050601@trash.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 14:02:27 +0100
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] netlink: fix NETLINK_RECV_NO_ENOBUFS in netlink_set_err()
Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> Patrick McHardy wrote:
>> Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>>> Currently, ENOBUFS errors are reported to the socket via
>>> netlink_set_err() even if NETLINK_RECV_NO_ENOBUFS is set. However,
>>> that should not happen. This fixes this problem and it changes the
>>> prototype of netlink_set_err() to return the number of sockets whose
>>> error has been set. This allows to know if any error has been set.
>>> This return value is used in the next patch in these bugfix series.
>> But that only happens if we have a message allocate error, which is
>> a different situation than rcvqueue overrun, which I thought the
>> original patch was supposed to handle (disable netlink congestion
>> control).
>
> Yes, allocation is a different situation but we still report ENOBUFS to
> user-space. I think that NETLINK_RECV_NO_ENOBUFS is there to a) disable
> ENOBUFS reports to user-space and b) disable Netlink congestion.
>
>> Is there any problem with these errors?
>
> Specifically in ctnetlink, if we fail to allocate a message in ctnetlink
> and NETLINK_RECV_NO_ENOBUFS is set, we still lose an event and that
> should not happen.
I assume you mean "not set"? Otherwise I fail to follow :)
--
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