From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alan Burlison Subject: Re: [Bug 106241] New: shutdown(3)/close(3) behaviour is incorrect for sockets in accept(3) Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:58:49 +0100 Message-ID: <5628CF79.2000507@oracle.com> References: <20151021034950.GL22011@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <5627A37B.4090208@oracle.com> <20151021185104.GM22011@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20151021.182955.1434243485706993231.davem@davemloft.net> <5628636E.1020107@oracle.com> <201510220615.t9M6FL2d017592@room101.nl.oracle.com> <1445513425.22974.100.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk, stephen@networkplumber.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, dholland-tech@netbsd.org To: Eric Dumazet , Casper.Dik@oracle.com Return-path: Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:46217 "EHLO userp1040.oracle.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750978AbbJVL7F (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Oct 2015 07:59:05 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1445513425.22974.100.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 22/10/2015 12:30, Eric Dumazet wrote: > We absolutely do not _want_ to do this just so that linux becomes slower > to the point Solaris can compete, or you guys can avoid some work. Sentiments such as that really have no place in a discussion that's been focussed primarily on the behaviour of interfaces, albeit with digressions into the potential performance impacts. The discussion has been cordial and I for one appreciate Al Viro's posts on the subject, from which I've leaned a lot. Can we please keep it that way? Thanks. > close(fd) is very far from knowing a file is a 'listener' or even a > 'socket' without extra cache line misses. > > To force a close of an accept() or whatever blocking socket related > system call a shutdown() makes a lot of sense. > > This would have zero additional overhead for the fast path. Yes, that would I believe be a significant improvement. -- Alan Burlison --