From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sowmini Varadhan Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] sunvnet: Schedule maybe_tx_wakeup as a tasklet from ldc_rx path Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 06:51:37 -0400 Message-ID: <20140813105137.GB16865@oracle.com> References: <20140812143531.GJ2404@oracle.com> <20140812.151352.2235795686370279748.davem@davemloft.net> <20140813015817.GA13600@oracle.com> <163B73C6-95EF-4398-B399-ECD5B95F5EC8@oracle.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Raghuram Kothakota Return-path: Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:27723 "EHLO aserp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750803AbaHMKvm (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Aug 2014 06:51:42 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <163B73C6-95EF-4398-B399-ECD5B95F5EC8@oracle.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On (08/12/14 21:26), Raghuram Kothakota wrote: > > We do not consider a peer which couldn't process LDC messages > as an offender but just a peer in a broken state. A peer could get So I was using "offender" in the same way that one typically talks about sending ICMP errors for "offending IP packets" (nothing pesonal :-)). I dont want to quibble over terminology here. > From what I read the ldc_disconect() code, it seems like it is reconfiguring > the queues, so I assume a reset event would re-enable the communication > fine, but I don't know for sure without testing this specific condition. No such events were generated by the code when I tested it. I'll send a consolidated reply to the rest of that very long thread in a bit. --Sowmini