From: Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@hp.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Linux SCTP Dev Mailing list <linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul <andrei@iptel.org>
Subject: Re: pull request: SCTP updates for net-next
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2009 10:05:34 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B1D19BE.4080903@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091204125233.eea7de39.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Dec 2009 11:23:14 -0500
> Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@hp.com> wrote:
>
>>> Overall, it would be way simpler and saner to clamp this value to some
>>> explicit time period, IMO.
>>>
>>> <pulls number out of thin air>
>>>
>>> --- a/net/sctp/socket.c~a
>>> +++ a/net/sctp/socket.c
>>> @@ -2086,9 +2086,8 @@ static int sctp_setsockopt_autoclose(str
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> if (copy_from_user(&sp->autoclose, optval, optlen))
>>> return -EFAULT;
>>> - /* make sure it won't exceed MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT */
>>> - if (sp->autoclose > (MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT / HZ) )
>>> - sp->autoclose = MAX_SCHEDULE_TIMEOUT / HZ ;
>>> + /* make sure it won't exceed one hour */
>>> + sp->autoclose = min_t(u32, sp->autoclose, 60 * 60);
>>>
>> But that may not be long enough. The spec doesn't impose limits
>> and it's really up to the application to decide how long it wants
>> to keep idle connections open. Thus any limits shorter the maximum
>> supported by kernel are really artificial and may not be sufficient.
>
> Could make ->autoclose a u64? That fixes any 32bit-vs-64bit
> inconsistencies and allows for an effectively infinite period.
>
That's isn't going to help much since the timer intervals are unsigned longs,
and would overflow on 32 bit systems. We would still need the limiting value to
prevent that overflow, but would be able to drop the cast. Additionally, the
API provides only for a 32 bit integer, thus we would waste 32 bit of space.
I don't think that's worth it. The last patch from Andrei fixed the warning
with a cast to u32. It seems like the simplest solution.
-vlad
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-07 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-23 21:06 pull request: SCTP updates for net-next Vlad Yasevich
2009-11-29 8:17 ` David Miller
2009-12-04 5:00 ` Andrew Morton
2009-12-04 16:23 ` Vlad Yasevich
2009-12-04 20:52 ` Andrew Morton
2009-12-07 15:05 ` Vlad Yasevich [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-06-03 14:33 pull request: sctp " Vlad Yasevich
2009-06-04 4:45 ` 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=4B1D19BE.4080903@hp.com \
--to=vladislav.yasevich@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andrei@iptel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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).