From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Cong Wang Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v4 3/3] net: reserve ports for applications using fixed port numbers Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2010 16:00:46 +0800 Message-ID: <4B7F96AE.1010102@redhat.com> References: <1266271241-6293-1-git-send-email-opurdila@ixiacom.com> <1266271241-6293-4-git-send-email-opurdila@ixiacom.com> <4B7A6740.1000701@redhat.com> <201002161306.29708.opurdila@ixiacom.com> <4B7A9852.5020105@redhat.com> <1266326425.3045.53.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4B7C159A.3060603@redhat.com> <1266424768.3075.61.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Octavian Purdila , David Miller , Linux Kernel Network Developers , Linux Kernel Developers , Neil Horman To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:4525 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751621Ab0BTH51 (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Feb 2010 02:57:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: <1266424768.3075.61.camel@edumazet-laptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Eric Dumazet wrote: > Le jeudi 18 f=C3=A9vrier 2010 =C3=A0 00:13 +0800, Cong Wang a =C3=A9c= rit : >=20 >> I don't think so, if you want to avoid race condition, you just need= to >> write the reserved ports before any networking application starts, I= OW, >> as early as possible during boot. >> >=20 > Sure, but I was thinking retrieving the list of reserved port by a > database query, using network :) >=20 > Anyway, I just feel your argument is not applicable. >=20 > Our kernel is capable of doing an intersection for us, we dont need > to forbid user to mark a port as 'reserved' if this port is already > blacklisted by another mechanism (for example, if this port is alread= y > in use) >=20 Oh, I see your points. But this still could make people confused, like me. I think we'd better document this. Thanks.