[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EEB40D5.7030906@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 08:00:05 -0500
From: Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>
To: Xi Wang <xi.wang@...il.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul <andrei@...el.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sctp: fix incorrect overflow check on autoclose
On 12/15/2011 05:13 PM, Xi Wang wrote:
> On Dec 15, 2011, at 4:07 PM, Vlad Yasevich wrote:
>> I think it would be better to keep this value in seconds and get rid
>> of division in the setsockopt code. We could then have a min and max
>> values where max value could be something like 2 days. I really don't
>> see an autoclose value that is bigger then that being very useful. In
>> fact, most of the time these values are very small as one wants to close
>> out idle associations.
>
> Now I start to think exposing a new sysctl option might be a little
> overkill since autoclose is often small.
>
> How about this?
>
> 1) Simply store autoclose in seconds in setsockopt.
>
> 2) Avoid overflow in associola.c.
>
> asoc->timeouts[SCTP_EVENT_TIMEOUT_AUTOCLOSE] =
> (sp->autoclose > MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT / HZ)
> ? MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT
> : (unsigned long)sp->autoclose * HZ;
>
> Or we could use INT_MAX instead of MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT if you want to
> keep that value consistent across 32/64 bits.
This would work as well. I do like the max configurable though as it
might be a nice feature, but the above code is exactly what I was
thinking about too.
-vlad
>
> - xi
>
--
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