On Tue, 11 Aug 2020 23:06:45 +0300
Vitaliy Makkoveev <m...@openbsd.org> wrote:
> We removed `pipex{in,out}q'. So now we can destroy pppac(4) session just
> like we do in pppx(4) case. Also there is no reason to allow
> pipex_timer() to destroy sessions - userland will do this by
> PIPEXDSESSION. This permit us to use existing pipex_get_closed() for
> both pppac(4) and pppx(4) without any modifications.
>
> So, I propose pipex_close_session() and pipex_timer() be like below.
It doesn't seem to fix "idle-timeout".
> We simplify pppac(4) session destruction. We unify behavior with pppx(4)
> - we killing session just now. There is no reason to modify
> pipex_get_closed() and pipex_link_session(). pppx(4) related sessions
> can be processed by pipex_timer(). There is no performance impact.
We need to modify pppx_get_closed() to implement idle-timeout.
> Do you like this? We can do two diffs. The first to unify destruction
> and the second to re-enable in-kernel timeout for pppx(4) and revert man
> pages modifications.
I have no objection to your "unify destruction".
I'll rebase my diff after that work.
