Re: [PATCH] ipv4 tcp autobind problem

netdev

Re: [PATCH] ipv4 tcp autobind problem

To:	kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:	Re: [PATCH] ipv4 tcp autobind problem
From:	Kovacs Krisztian <hidden@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Tue, 07 Oct 2003 14:35:50 +0200
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Balazs Scheidler <bazsi@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to:	<200310071156.PAA31530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References:	<200310071156.PAA31530@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030825 Debian/1.4-XD2.1


  Hi,

kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

Right place to finish tracking is when socket is removed from TCP
hash tables, and to start tracking is when the socket is inserted
to TCP hash tables. BTW you would not see the problem with binding
if it was made right.

Thanks for the reply. In the meantime, although because of slightlydifferent reasons, we also came to the same conclusion. Right now I'mtesting a version in which our "unassign" hook is removed frominet_release(), and added to udp_v4_unhash() and tcp_put_port().However, I'm not quite sure there won't be locking problems when callingour hook from these places.


--
  Regards,
    Krisztian KOVACS

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: Fw: Re: [PATCH] ipv4 tcp autobind problem, kuznet Re: [PATCH] ipv4 tcp autobind problem, Kovacs Krisztian <=

Previous by Date:	e1000 close (NAPI), Robert Olsson
Next by Date:	Re: [Patch]: IPv6 Connection Tracking, Harald Welte
Previous by Thread:	Re: Fw: Re: [PATCH] ipv4 tcp autobind problem, kuznet
Next by Thread:	TCP:Is it possible for both sk->dead==1 and sk->lock.users==1 to be true?, zrzeng
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]