lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Thu, 24 Mar 2016 15:22:22 +0100
From:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Tolga Ceylan <tolga.ceylan@...il.com>,
	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>, cgallek@...gle.com,
	Josh Snyder <josh@...e406.com>,
	Aaron Conole <aconole@...heb.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] net: Add SO_REUSEPORT_LISTEN_OFF socket option as
 drain mode

Hi Eric,

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 07:13:33AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-03-24 at 07:12 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:10:06PM -0700, Tolga Ceylan wrote:
> > > I apologize for not properly following up on this. I had the
> > > impression that we did not want to merge my original patch and then I
> > > also noticed that it fails to keep the hash consistent. Recently, I
> > > read the follow ups on it as well as Willy's patch/proposals.
> > > 
> > > Is there any update on Willy's SO_REUSEPORT patch? IMHO, it solves the
> > > problem and it is simpler than adding new sock option.
> > 
> > no, Craig's changes were merged, and I haven't checked yet if my patch
> > needs to be rebased or still applies. Feel free to check it and resubmit
> > if you have time.
> 
> No need for a patch AFAIK.
> 
> BPF solution is generic enough.
> 
> All user space needs to do is to update the BPF filter so that the
> listener needing to be dismantled does not receive any new packet.

But that means that any software making use of SO_REUSEPORT needs to
also implement BPF on Linux to achieve the same as what it does on
other OSes ? Also I found a case where a dying process would still
cause trouble in the accept queue, maybe it's not redistributed, I
don't remember, all I remember is that my traffic stopped after a
segfault of only one of them :-/ I'll have to dig a bit regarding
this.

Thanks,
Willy

Powered by blists - more mailing lists