From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick Mansfield Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2004 01:24:53 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] convert udevsend/udevd to DGRAM and single-threaded Message-Id: <20040206172453.A10417@beaverton.ibm.com> List-Id: References: <40232F58.3040404@sympatico.ca> In-Reply-To: <40232F58.3040404@sympatico.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 05:22:23PM -0500, Chris Friesen wrote: > Patrick Mansfield wrote: > > >>On Fri, Feb 06, 2004 at 01:08:24AM -0500, Chris Friesen wrote: > > >>- ssock = socket(AF_LOCAL, SOCK_STREAM, 0); > >>+ ssock = socket(AF_LOCAL, SOCK_DGRAM, 0); > > > > How are dropped packets handled? > If udevd is not present, then the udevsend creates it. Otherwise, it blocks > until the message is placed in udevd's buffer. No problem there. > > If udevd crashes after the message was placed in its rx buffer but before > handling it, then you have a problem, but this problem exists for any protocol > and to solve it you need to have an ack message sent back to udevsend *after* > the udev has run and returned for that message. I mean, SOCK_DGRAM is an unreliable transport, so what happens if the transport drops packets? It might be unlikely, especially for the AF_LOCAL, but it is possible. I don't see any ack or retransmit code in udevsend. -- Patrick Mansfield ------------------------------------------------------- The SF.Net email is sponsored by EclipseCon 2004 Premiere Conference on Open Tools Development and Integration See the breadth of Eclipse activity. February 3-5 in Anaheim, CA. http://www.eclipsecon.org/osdn _______________________________________________ Linux-hotplug-devel mailing list http://linux-hotplug.sourceforge.net Linux-hotplug-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-hotplug-devel