[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201104130906.19882.cyril.bonte@free.fr>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 09:06:19 +0200
From: Cyril Bonté <cyril.bonte@...e.fr>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, bugzilla-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org,
bugme-daemon@...zilla.kernel.org, kees@...flux.net
Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 32832] New: shutdown(2) does not fully shut down socket any more
Le mercredi 13 avril 2011 04:55:27, Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> I worked on it this week end to discover FreeBSD 8.1 would not allow
> several CLOSE sockets bound to same port even with REUSEADDR.
Just to complete the information, yes it does, but only after a shutdown()
call. And this is the use case of haproxy, amavisd (quoted in the bugzilla bug
report), and others.
> So haproxy claim is a bit wrong (its trick doesnt work on FreeBSD), and
> used an undocumented linux feature.
Both test cases (the one I provided to explain the haproxy issue and the one
provided by Kees) are not about binding 2 sockets at the same time but binding
a new socket after the first one has been shutdown.
Sadly this also looks undocumented on FreeBSD (only saw a reference on it in a
code comment).
> Since SO_REUSEPORT is not a 'stable fix', I suggest we revert the patch,
> and eventually work on SO_REUSEPORT on net-next-2.6
>
> What do you think ?
Agree.
Many thanks for the time you already spent on that.
--
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