[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1301767848.2837.14.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2011 20:10:48 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Cyril Bonté <cyril.bonte@...e.fr>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Daniel Baluta <daniel.baluta@...il.com>,
Gaspar Chilingarov <gasparch@...il.com>,
Charles Duffy <charles@...is.net>, Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
Subject: Re: tcp: disallow bind() to reuse addr/port regression in 2.6.38
Le samedi 02 avril 2011 à 20:01 +0200, Cyril Bonté a écrit :
> Hi All,
>
> (2nd try to fix the mailing list address)
>
> It has been reported that kernel 2.6.38 prevented the load balancer haproxy to
> reload. After reading the kernel Changelog, it looks like the following commit
> has a negative side effect on the the way haproxy "pauses" its listening
> sockets to start a new process :
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=c191a836a908d1dd6b40c503741f91b914de3348
>
> Disabling the TCPF_CLOSE flag condition reallows to work as before. I guess
> this was done for good reasons (Sorry, I haven't found the thread about that
> commit in the archives yet) but other applications may also be impacted by
> this change.
>
> I add Willy Tarreau to the CC to open the discussion.
>
> if (shutdown(listenfd, SHUT_WR) == 0 &&
> listen(listenfd, 1024) == 0 &&
> shutdown(listenfd, SHUT_RD) == 0) {
> printf("shutdown OK\n");
> }
> }
> exit(0);
> }
>
Wow, not clear what this is doing....
for sure the listen() call is not needed ?
And the shutdown(listenfd, SHUT_WR) is clearly useless too.
I feel you only needed the shutdown(listenfd, SHUT_RD) call.
Why haproxy needs to setup a second listening socket on same port ?
--
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