[lkml]   [1998]   [Mar]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: bug in 2.1.89 include/net/sock.h?
       Date: Sun, 22 Mar 1998 19:15:59 -0500
    From: Bill Hawes <>

    But if you don't update the socket counters for cloned skb's, could
    you get a situation where the counter appears to be back to zero,
    but there's still a clone skb being processed? This could possibly
    lead to a socket being destroyed to early, as the memory counters
    determine when to delay destruction.

    So it seems that a clone skb should be counted for some non-zero
    amount, if not the full data size.

    Interesting... I think you're right on this one. And this is probably
    why things act the way they currently do (charing the full skb size
    even for cloned copies).

    Ho hum, we have to think about this some more I suppose.

    I've considered for right now to charge for a clone sizeof(struct
    sk_buff) bytes to the sock. But then a special destructor is still
    needed so the wakeup is avoided. And actually as Linus pointed out
    this cannot happen (avoid the wakeup when some bytes are charged) so
    as to avoid deadlock situations when the sock owner sleeps because it
    needs some write space....

    More pondering on this is needed...

    David S. Miller

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:41    [W:0.019 / U:5.772 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site