netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [patch 4/10] s390: network driver.

To: Paul Jakma <paul@xxxxxxxx>, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [patch 4/10] s390: network driver.
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 13:56:32 -0500
Cc: Tommy Christensen <tommy.christensen@xxxxxxxxx>, Thomas Spatzier <thomas.spatzier@xxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Hasso Tepper <hasso@xxxxxxxxx>, Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0412201413240.5211@sheen.jakma.org>
References: <OF28701C56.81E1D26E-ONC1256F6B.00513EDD-C1256F6B.0052AF84@de.ibm.com> <1103484552.1046.155.camel@jzny.localdomain> <41C600D7.70005@tpack.net> <1103497516.1046.231.camel@jzny.localdomain> <41C612BC.5070909@tpack.net> <Pine.LNX.4.61.0412201413240.5211@sheen.jakma.org>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20040922
Paul Jakma wrote:
  responsibility of the application to flush the socket on
  link-down events (by down'ing the interface?).


That seems more complex than needs be, for userspace at least.

It is the responsibility of the kernel to push complexity to userland.

Some applications may NOT desire that the socket be flushed. That's an app policy decision.

If this is the core issue, then I am even more inclined to think that the kernel is not what needs to be modified here.

        Jeff




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>