Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:34:34 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2.6.25.7 v1-v2] af_unix: fix 'poll for write'/connected DGRAM sockets | From | David Miller <> |
| |
From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 15:35:25 +0200
> For n:1 'datagram connections' (eg /dev/log), the unix_dgram_sendmsg > routine implements a form of receiver-imposed flow control by > comparing the length of the receive queue of the 'peer socket' with > the max_ack_backlog value stored in the corresponding sock structure, > either blocking the thread which caused the send-routine to be called > or returning EAGAIN. This routine is used by both SOCK_DGRAM and > SOCK_SEQPACKET sockets. The poll-implementation for these socket types > is datagram_poll from core/datagram.c. A socket is deemed to be > writeable by this routine when the memory presently consumed by > datagrams owned by it is less than the configured socket send buffer > size. This is always wrong for PF_UNIX non-stream sockets connected to > server sockets dealing with (potentially) multiple clients if the > abovementioned receive queue is currently considered to be full. > 'poll' will then return, indicating that the socket is writeable, but > a subsequent write result in EAGAIN, effectively causing an (usual) > application to 'poll for writeability by repeated send request with > O_NONBLOCK set' until it has consumed its time quantum. > > The change below uses a suitably modified variant of the datagram_poll > routines for both type of PF_UNIX sockets, which tests if the > recv-queue of the peer a socket is connected to is presently > considered to be 'full' as part of the 'is this socket > writeable'-checking code. The socket being polled is additionally > put onto the peer_wait wait queue associated with its peer, because the > unix_dgram_recvmsg routine does a wake up on this queue after a > datagram was received and the 'other wakeup call' is done implicitly > as part of skb destruction, meaning, a process blocked in poll > because of a full peer receive queue could otherwise sleep forever > if no datagram owned by its socket was already sitting on this queue. > Among this change is a small (inline) helper routine named > 'unix_recvq_full', which consolidates the actual testing code (in three > different places) into a single location. > > Signed-off-by: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@mssgmbh.com>
Applied, thanks a lot Rainer.
| |