From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Smith Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] c/r: Add AF_UNIX support (v6) Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 08:16:06 -0700 Message-ID: <87ws5jlidl.fsf@caffeine.danplanet.com> References: <1248295301-30930-1-git-send-email-danms@us.ibm.com> <1248295301-30930-6-git-send-email-danms@us.ibm.com> <4A6F2D62.9040005@librato.com> <87ljm8czsf.fsf@caffeine.danplanet.com> <4A6F6B19.9010508@librato.com> <878wi6yxui.fsf@caffeine.danplanet.com> <4A77F0EF.9090602@librato.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: containers@lists.osdl.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Dobriyan To: Oren Laadan Return-path: Received: from gw0.danplanet.com ([71.245.107.82]:39002 "EHLO mail.danplanet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932624AbZHDPQI (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Aug 2009 11:16:08 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4A77F0EF.9090602@librato.com> (Oren Laadan's message of "Tue\, 04 Aug 2009 04\:27\:27 -0400") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: OL> Does this mean that a situation of A->B and B->C is valid only as OL> long as A->B is done first, otherwise A->B will fail because B OL> will already be connected to C ? Correct. OL> Then, the other problem is to restore correctly you need to mimic OL> the behavior of sendto() because of the way the skb references the OL> original socket for the write-buf accounting :( OL> In turn, this means that during checkpoint you need to record the OL> _origin_ of each buffer in the queue of afunix dgram sockets :(( Or return EBUSY when there are skb's that are outstanding from before the re-connect, right? -- Dan Smith IBM Linux Technology Center email: danms@us.ibm.com