Re: sockets affected by IPsec always block (2.6.23)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



David Miller wrote:
From: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 11:12:32 +1100

[INET]: Export non-blocking flags to proto connect call

Previously we made connect(2) block on IPsec SA resolution.  This is
good in general but not desirable for non-blocking sockets.

To fix this properly we'd need to implement the larval IPsec dst stuff
that we talked about.  For now let's just revert to the old behaviour
on non-blocking sockets.

Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <[email protected]>

We made an explicit decision not to do things this way.

Non-blocking has a meaning dependant upon the xfrm_larval_drop sysctl
setting, and this is across the board.  If xfrm_larval_drop is zero,
non-blocking semantics do not extend to IPSEC route resolution,
otherwise it does.

If he sets this sysctl to "1" as I detailed in my reply, he'll
get the behavior he wants.

I think you for the hint, but I would hardly call this sentence "detailed" in terms of being a cookbook solution to the problem.

--
Bill Davidsen <[email protected]>
  "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux