| To: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: netlink drops messages. |
| From: | Chris Wedgwood <cw@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 19 Jan 2001 01:41:48 +1300 |
| Cc: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Werner Almesberger <Werner.Almesberger@xxxxxxx>, "James R. Leu" <jleu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, gleb@xxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20010118125936.B3272@xxxxxxxxxx>; from ak@xxxxxx on Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 12:59:36PM +0100 |
| References: | <20010117122413.B18286@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.GSO.4.30.0101170744100.20342-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20010118125936.B3272@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
On Thu, Jan 18, 2001 at 12:59:36PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
Or you hack the kernel to directly update a shared memory with
the needed information with appropiate locking. Then there is no
buffer to overflow, at worst you could get some problems with the
locks in overload cases.
freaky timing -- I just suggested something along those lines myself;
I'm not sure how we would implement locking and overflow though, I
suggested signals but that is perhaps a little gross.
--cw
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: netlink drops messages., Chris Wedgwood |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: internal drops with tcp, kernel 2.2.16, Chris Wedgwood |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: netlink drops messages., Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: netlink drops messages., jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |