[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c3525855-3910-4395-b4ad-4ed23053746e@ovn.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2024 20:22:27 +0200
From: Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@....org>
To: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@...hat.com>
Cc: i.maximets@....org, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
donald.hunter@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] inet: bring NLM_DONE out to a separate recv() again
On 4/12/24 20:03, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 19:38:53 +0200
> Ilya Maximets <i.maximets@....org> wrote:
>
>> On 4/12/24 19:22, Stefano Brivio wrote:
>>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 14:01:54 -0700
>>> Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 13:45:42 -0600 David Ahern wrote:
>>>>>> + /* Don't let NLM_DONE coalesce into a message, even if it could.
>>>>>> + * Some user space expects NLM_DONE in a separate recv().
>>>>>
>>>>> that's unfortunate
>>>>
>>>> Do you have an opinion on the sysfs/opt-in question?
>>>> Feels to me like there shouldn't be that much user space doing raw
>>>> netlink, without a library. Old crufty code usually does ioctls, right?
>>>
>>> I think so too -- if there were more (maintained) applications with
>>> this issue, we would have noticed by now.
>>
>> It depends on how you define "maintained". Most application devs
>> do not test with unreleased kernels.
>
> I haven't, either, but users started shouting: we have nowadays plenty
> of distributions shipping unreleased kernels.
>
In OVS we typically don't get any bug reports from users until the
issue hits a major distribution like RHEL or Ubuntu.
Slightly different crowd, I guess. :)
Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists