Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 12 Sep 2009 13:41:10 +0400 | From | Evgeniy Polyakov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/8] networking/fanotify: declare fanotify socket numbers |
| |
On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 05:51:42PM -0400, Eric Paris (eparis@redhat.com) wrote: > For some things yes, some things no. I'd have to understand where loss > can happen to know if it's feasible. If I know loss happens in the > sender context that's great. If it's somewhere in the middle and the > sender doesn't immediately know it'll never be delivered, yes, I don't > think it can solve all my needs. How many places can and skb get lost > between the sender and the receiver?
When queue is full or you do not have enough RAM. Both are reported at 'sending' time.
As of your description of netlink/socket usage - you will have to peek skb queue, which is rather error-prone operation. Also you will have to implement own skb destructor to mess with private reference counters and netlink bits.
-- Evgeniy Polyakov
| |