From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Teach trinity to not use some sockets family
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 00:05:45 +0400
Message-ID: <20131031200545.GF9860@moon>
References: <1382650768-30954-1-git-send-email-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <CAM5jBj5dvv1HP6ffRnP+b5sQkd0mP3nDcEU-N6+pYvaZ6b3epw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20131031194943.GA8696@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <trinity-owner@vger.kernel.org>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version
         :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent;
        bh=aNWSyrEgU4UWxQIp2GyHts1cmYPuze6Ftrf72cVefps=;
        b=L02DYkLLgWttLvmyxqVnzF5ozAjlGfuANpv4xFeronrQPcwKA1nNvDgrm3z5fBWI2S
         /lID+YoGWhZFz/Qlg360FLFCGu8HLosgk7/mn0Vj8E2fJDZC7yMdWEWDoeRWsAH/uRXL
         ymTyvnVI7EGimeZ87dJO3wtJcu5okAKFHbAufb4yCze3Rw5CnNyKVGinXSo7WDuXN8hX
         gNxGSnlKnwZGYrM8MiGps5N0XlaaOx/0pOqTrXmwrtGcCJZdYUvShro13UWnX3JEX8lB
         CmtA/+KDq4WDZPGQkbVM32q7GRNasNTDbn399YAJ/CW4WCU6i2kg7TbEJfnG4VpTljPY
         NWnQ==
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20131031194943.GA8696@redhat.com>
Sender: trinity-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <trinity.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>
Cc: trinity@vger.kernel.org, Vladimir Davydov <vdavydov@parallels.com>

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 03:49:43PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:48:58AM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
>  > On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 1:39 AM, Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:
>  > > When I've been running trinity on testing machine admins were
>  > > not that happy about traffic generated by trinity (especially
>  > > ones created with packet socket). So here is an attempt to teach
>  > > trinity to use say only some set of sockets if needed with help
>  > > of --fds option.
>  > >
>  > > Please take a look, thanks.
>  > 
>  > Drop the serice please, it'll be reworked.
> 
> I'm about to apply your later series, but I noticed that that one
> instead of the --fds patch, has the -E change.
> 
> Do you still plan on submitting the --fds change later?
> The reason I ask is that it if we're doing --fds, then it might at some point
> mean we can deprecate (and then remove) use of -P in favor of it, so adding an
> inverse (-E) seems odd.

Hi Dave! To be fair, not sure at moment. Initially I wanted to implement a general
--fds option which might take more complex command line like sockets:PF_X,^PF_X and
such, then extend it to file:^pipe,epoll. But this end up in being somehow
more complex rework. So I decided to stick with simplier approach first -- -E option
which would exclude some socket protocols from being generated.

But sure, once time permit I can try to implement --fds option as well. Lets fisrt
summarize what kind of syntax it will carry.

 --fds [sockets:PF_X,^PF_X,N,^N,all,none],[files:pipe,^epoll,all,none]

Sounds good?