Re: [1/1] connector/CBUS: new messaging subsystem. Revision number next.

Evgeniy Polyakov
2005-04-26T18:11:13Z

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 22:03:54 +0400
Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@2ka.mipt.ru> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:31:58 -0500
> Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > There may not be the same work with different data.
> > >
> >
> > Ugh, that really blows. Now every user of a particular message type
> > has to coordinate efforts with other users of the same message type...
> >
> > Imability to "fire and forget" undermines usefulness of whole
> > connector. How will you for example implement hotplug notification
> > over connector? Have kobject_hotplug wait and block other instances?
> > But wait on what?
>
> This is a simple load balancing schema.
> Netlink messages may be dropped in socket queue when
> they are bing delivered to userspace - this is the same -
> if work queue can not be scheduled, message will be dropped,
> but in this case userspace also can not be scheduled
> and message will be dropped.

Btw, I belive we see that it is reverse direction...
So we have reverse load balancing schema here -
exactly like userspace socket queueing.
We basically can not sleep here - it will be DOS.

> > --
> > Dmitry
> >
>
>
> Evgeniy Polyakov
>
> Only failure makes us experts. -- Theo de Raadt

Evgeniy Polyakov

Only failure makes us experts. -- Theo de Raadt