From: Marcelo Ricardo
> Sent: 10 September 2015 15:36
...
> > Given that the first ->create() blocks while the protocol code loads
> > it really wouldn't be right to error a subsequent ->create() because
> > the load hasn't completed.
>
> Can't say I don't agree with you, but at the same time, there are other
> temporary errors that can happen and that the user should just retry.
> This would be just another condition in a trade off for avoiding complexity.
We do retry, but the delay messes up out test scripts :-(
> > I hold a semaphore across sock_create_kern() because of issues with sctp.
> > (Current kernels are nowhere near as bad as really old ones though.)
>
> Oh, that's not good to hear. I'll experiment with that later, try to
> catch some bugs. :)
I mean REALLY old - like 2.6.12 (FC3).
I'm pretty sure I've seen oops as well as create failing.
We don't create enough sockets for the semaphore to be a problem.
OTOH I've a current problem with a customer using RHEL5.8 (basically 2.6.18).
They might manage to move to RHEL6 (2.6.32) - but that could take a year or two.
RH might be pulling some of the SCTP fixes, but I doubt they get priority.
David
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
