From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: RichardFliam Subject: Best route for re-implementing TCPHA Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 17:08:33 -0600 Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from mail-vw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.212.46]:46761 "EHLO mail-vw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758603Ab1DMXIe convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:08:34 -0400 Received: by vws1 with SMTP id 1so874383vws.19 for ; Wed, 13 Apr 2011 16:08:33 -0700 (PDT) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: TCPHA (http://dragon.linux-vs.org/~dragonfly/htm/tcpha.htm)=A0provided several neat features for content and health aware load balancing. I am looking to re-implement on the 2.6 kernel and I am struck by indecision on a few key features. In particular the original project created its own polling methods for TCP sockets based on fs/select.c and tcp_poll but to me this seems inelegant. I am wondering if there is a "correct" way to poll sockets in kernel or should I simply call sock_map_fd on the kernel socket. After extensive searching I did find this post http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/180354 to this mailing list, but it does not seem to contain an answer as to the correct direction for polling tcp sockets in kernel. -- --Richard Fliam