On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 05:23:46PM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 31/03/20(Tue) 16:48, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> > I refactored pppx(4). The idea is to use pipex(4) as it was designed.
> > No one holds pipex_session outside pipex(4) so pipex_timer() calls are
> > safe. Unfortunately, this way gives some performance impact, because we
> > need to call pipex_lookup_by_session_id() in some places. This impact
> > will gone after pipex_session becames safely shared between multiple
> > holders and this is my next goal.
>
> I'd be more confident if we could go with the one-line change that you
> submitted in the first mail of this thread without the debugging
> messages.
>
> Mixing bug-fixes (or features) and refactoring is not a great
> development practise as it might hide the point of the change and
> introduce or expose new bugs.
>
I changed my original patch. Since npppd(8) ignores ioctl() errors and
client will be connected without pppx(4) interface creation I decide to
lie npppd(8).
Index: net/if_pppx.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/net/if_pppx.c,v
retrieving revision 1.77
diff -u -p -r1.77 if_pppx.c
--- net/if_pppx.c 26 Mar 2020 16:50:46 -0000 1.77
+++ net/if_pppx.c 31 Mar 2020 15:48:26 -0000
@@ -665,6 +665,13 @@ pppx_add_session(struct pppx_dev *pxd, s
struct ifnet *over_ifp = NULL;
#endif
+ /*
+ * XXX: prevent pxi destruction by pipex_timer()
+ * npppd(8) ignores pppx_add_session() errors so fake it
+ */
+ if (req->pr_timeout_sec != 0)
+ req->pr_timeout_sec = 0;
+
switch (req->pr_protocol) {
#ifdef PIPEX_PPPOE
case PIPEX_PROTO_PPPOE:
