From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Date: Sat, 21 Feb 2004 00:43:04 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] closing the loop -- retries and acks Message-Id: <20040221004304.GE18146@kroah.com> List-Id: References: <403305A3.2070604@sympatico.ca> In-Reply-To: <403305A3.2070604@sympatico.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 18, 2004 at 01:26:43AM -0500, Chris Friesen wrote: > This patch reduces the already low chances of lost messages. > > Once udevsend successfully sends a message, it waits with a timeout for > a response. If the response is good, then all is well, otherwise it > sends the message again. > > In udevd, when we receive a request we store the address of the > requestor, and then once the request has been handled we then send an > ack back so that they know they have been taken care of. > > This patch takes care of the basics, but there are still a few things left: > 1) tuning timeouts and retry numbers Yeah, this is going to be the hardest in order to get this to work "properly". What happens on a heavily loaded system? What would be the proper timeout for that? The idea is nice, but do we really need this? Has anyone ever lost a hotplug message yet? I've tested a lot, under very high load and haven't. Any distros test udev out yet and feel that such a scheme is necessary for them? thanks, greg k-h ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id56&alloc_id438&op=click _______________________________________________ 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