From: Dmitry Yusupov <dmitry_yus@yahoo.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com, davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] NETLINK_UESTABLISHED notifier event
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2005 08:16:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1112800602.9213.27.camel@mylaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050406060343.GA14059@gondor.apana.org.au>
On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 16:03 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 05, 2005 at 10:55:01PM -0700, Dmitry Yusupov wrote:
> >
> > main reason for this is to have clear way to notify netlink user that
> > new socket created and bound.
>
> Why do you want to exclude sockets that listen to multicast
> messages? They can still do unicast transactions.
this probably makes sense. I didn't do that intentionally, all I wanted
is to have the clean way to initialize control structures in proper time
- NETLINK_UESTABLISHED so it will work with my application. If you want
to extent change for multicast - feel free.
> > one reason is for consistency with sock interface. sk_allocation is
> > equal to GFP_KERNEL by default, so nothing changed. but. in some cases
> > application might require non-blocking kmalloc behavior. one real life
> > example is networking block device used for swap partition. this way any
> > GFP_KERENL allocation on recovery path might lead to deadlock condition.
>
> Setting of sk_allocation is controlled by the protocol itself. In this
> case this is af_netlink.c. As you can see, we never set this to anything
> other than GFP_KERNEL.
>
> Using sk_allocation will only confuse those who are not familiar with
> netlink into thinking that this can be atomic.
I don't think so. It is not clean enough to call alloc_skb() with hard-
coded vm priority. And it limits netlink in the way I described before.
If we want to defer critical processing to the user-space(like number of
applications includes: iscsi, lvm, multipath, fuse...), this change is
essential. Having GFP_KERNEL hard-coded will lead to deadlock on "down"
calls in some cases. So, we do need this change to make a progress.
> Cheers,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-06 15:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-05 19:54 [PATCH] NETLINK_UESTABLISHED notifier event Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-05 21:39 ` Jean-Mickael Guerin
2005-04-05 23:53 ` Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-06 0:13 ` Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-06 2:45 ` Herbert Xu
2005-04-06 5:55 ` Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-06 6:03 ` Herbert Xu
2005-04-06 15:16 ` Dmitry Yusupov [this message]
2005-04-06 16:23 ` Mike Christie
2005-04-06 21:29 ` Herbert Xu
2005-04-06 21:37 ` Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-06 22:04 ` Herbert Xu
2005-04-06 22:26 ` Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-07 11:30 ` jamal
2005-04-07 15:05 ` Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-07 21:32 ` Herbert Xu
2005-04-07 23:36 ` Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-08 11:36 ` Herbert Xu
2005-04-08 15:30 ` Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-09 1:44 ` Herbert Xu
2005-04-09 16:02 ` Dmitry Yusupov
2005-04-09 19:36 ` Herbert Xu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1112800602.9213.27.camel@mylaptop \
--to=dmitry_yus@yahoo.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).