On Fri, Feb 02, 2007 at 07:42:52PM +1100, Nick Piggin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Anyway, I had a look at your bugzilla test-case and managed to slim it > down to something that easily shows what the problem is (available on > request) -- the problem is that recipient of the sendfile is seeing > modifications that occur to the source file _after_ the sender has > completed the sendfile, because the file pages are not copied but > queued. > > I think the usual approach to what you are trying to do is to set TCP_CORK, > then write(2) the header into the socket, then sendfile directly from the > file you want. > > Another approach I guess is to implement an ack in your userland protocol > so you do not modify the sendfile source file until the client acks that > it has all the data.
Mark, don't you use e1000 or other scatter-gather capable nic with checksum offload? Likely yes. Actual data sucking in that case happens when packet is supposed to be transmitted by the NIC, not when sendfile() is returned. The same applies to the case, when you have fancy egress filtering. It is not allowed to modify pages until they are really transmitted, if you want data integrity. There are _no_ bugs in network or VFS cache in this test case. > I'm not sure if there are any other usual ways to do this (ie. a barrier > for sendfile, to ensure it will not pick up "future" modifications to the > file). netdev cc'ed, someone there might have additional comments. > > Please close this bug if/when you are satisfied it is not a kernel problem. > > Thanks, > Nick > > -- > SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. > Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com -- Evgeniy Polyakov - 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/
