Re: [PATCH 1/8] networking/fanotify: declare fanotify socket numbers

Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-09-12T09:41:11Z

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 05:51:42PM -0400, Eric Paris (eparis@redhat.com) wrote:
> For some things yes, some things no. I'd have to understand where loss
> can happen to know if it's feasible. If I know loss happens in the
> sender context that's great. If it's somewhere in the middle and the
> sender doesn't immediately know it'll never be delivered, yes, I don't
> think it can solve all my needs. How many places can and skb get lost
> between the sender and the receiver?

When queue is full or you do not have enough RAM. Both are reported at
'sending' time.

As of your description of netlink/socket usage - you will have to peek
skb queue, which is rather error-prone operation. Also you will have to
implement own skb destructor to mess with private reference counters and
netlink bits.

--
Evgeniy Polyakov