netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: netlink drops messages.

To: kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: netlink drops messages.
From: "James R. Leu" <jleu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 12:12:52 -0600
Cc: Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200101161754.UAA31048@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:54:53PM +0300
Organization: none
References: <20010116193553.B5122@xxxxxxxxxxx> <200101161754.UAA31048@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: jleu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,

On Tue, Jan 16, 2001 at 08:54:53PM +0300, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> >  Recently I noticed that when I simultaneously do 'up' to many network 
> > interfaces
> > (many is ~15) netlink drops part of the messages about interface state 
> > change and thus 
> > my userspace tools don't know that some interfaces are in up state now. The 
> > error that 
> > I get from netlink socket is "No buffer space available". 
> 
> Which means that applications must invalidate stored state
> and to resynchronize doing dumps of all the necessary information.

Just want to make sure I didn't mis-understand you:

Are you saying that an application should not rely on netlink to deliver
accurate and complete information about interface or routing changes?
AND that re-reading the entire route table or interface table is the correct
solution to this problem?

Jim

> > sk->receive_queue simultaneously is about 16 only!
> 
> 16 or 116, this is not very essential.
> 
> Of course, page size is sort of overkill, but I do not want to estimate
> required room forward. Application must be able to resync in any case.
> 
> Alexey

-- 
James R. Leu

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