From: Stefan Rompf <stefan@loplof.de>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, simon@fire.lp0.eu,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sockets affected by IPsec always block (2.6.23)
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 11:56:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200712061156.48810.stefan@loplof.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071206.005344.74817074.davem@davemloft.net>
Am Donnerstag, 6. Dezember 2007 09:53 schrieb David Miller:
> > I think the words "shall fail" and "immediately" are quite clear.
>
> They are, but the context in which they apply is vague.
"socket is connection-mode" => SOCK_STREAM
> I can equally generate examples where the non-blocking behavior you
> are a proponent of would break non-blocking UDP apps during a
> sendmsg() call when we hit IPSEC resolution. Yet similar language on
> blocking semantics exists for sendmsg() in the standards.
I am not a good enough kernel hacker to exactly understand the code flow in
udp_sendmsg(). However, it seems that it first checks destination validity
via ip_route_output_flow() and queues the message then. The sendmsg()
documentation only talks about buffer space. I can see your dilemma.
The reason why I'm pushing this issue another time is that I know quite a
bit about system level application development. A very typical design pattern
for non-naive single or multi threaded programs is that they set all
communication sockets to be nonblocking and use a select()/epoll() based loop
to dispatch IO. This often includes initiating a TCP connect() and
asynchronously waiting for it to finish or fail from the main loop.
The dangerous situation here is that in 99% of all cases things will just work
because the phase 2 SA exists. In 0.8%, the SA will be established in <1 sec.
However, in the rest of time the server application that you have considered
to be stable will end up sleeping with all threads in a connect() call that
is supposed to return immediatly.
> The world is shades of gray, implying anything else is foolhardy and
> that's how I'm handling this.
Even though I consider programmers that ignore the result code on a
nonblocking UDP sendmsg() fools, I agree. May be the best compromise is what
Herbert Xu suggested in <20071205001230.GA11391@gondor.apana.org.au> in this
thread: At least, for connect() O_NONBLOCK ist ALWAYS respected. Because this
is where the chance for breakage is highest.
Stefan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-12-06 10:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-04 18:53 sockets affected by IPsec always block (2.6.23) Simon Arlott
2007-12-05 0:12 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-05 6:30 ` David Miller
2007-12-05 6:51 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-05 7:12 ` David Miller
2007-12-05 7:16 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-05 7:34 ` David Miller
2007-12-05 7:39 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-05 9:55 ` David Miller
2007-12-05 9:57 ` Herbert Xu
2007-12-05 18:42 ` Stefan Rompf
2007-12-05 18:39 ` Stefan Rompf
2007-12-06 2:25 ` David Miller
2007-12-06 8:49 ` Stefan Rompf
2007-12-06 8:53 ` David Miller
2007-12-06 10:56 ` Stefan Rompf [this message]
2007-12-06 11:13 ` David Miller
2007-12-06 11:35 ` Stefan Rompf
2007-12-06 11:39 ` David Miller
2007-12-06 12:30 ` Stefan Rompf
2007-12-06 13:55 ` David Miller
2007-12-06 14:31 ` Stefan Rompf
2007-12-07 3:20 ` David Miller
2007-12-07 9:29 ` Stefan Rompf
2007-12-16 22:47 ` Bill Davidsen
2007-12-16 23:22 ` David Miller
2007-12-05 6:06 ` David Miller
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=200712061156.48810.stefan@loplof.de \
--to=stefan@loplof.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=simon@fire.lp0.eu \
/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).