On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 20:49 +0000, James Courtier-Dutton wrote: > Jesper Juhl wrote: > > On 12/14/05, Sridhar Samudrala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>These set of patches provide a TCP/IP emergency communication mechanism that > >>could be used to guarantee high priority communications over a critical > >>socket > >>to succeed even under very low memory conditions that last for a couple of > >>minutes. It uses the critical page pool facility provided by Matt's patches > >>that he posted recently on lkml. > >> http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/12/14/34/index.html > >> > >>This mechanism provides a new socket option SO_CRITICAL that can be used to > >>mark a socket as critical. A critical connection used for emergency > > > > > > So now everyone writing commercial apps for Linux are going to set > > SO_CRITICAL on sockets in their apps so their apps can "survive better > > under pressure than the competitors aps" and clueless programmers all > > over are going to think "cool, with this I can make my app more > > important than everyone elses, I'm going to use this". When everyone > > and his dog starts to set this, what's the point? > > > > > > I don't think the initial patches that Matt did were intended for what > you are describing. > When I had the conversation with Matt at KS, the problem we were trying > to solve was "Memory pressure with network attached swap space". > I came up with the idea that I think Matt has implemented. > Letting the OS choose which are "critical" TCP/IP sessions is fine. But > letting an application choose is a recipe for disaster.
We could easily add capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN) check to allow this option to be set only by privileged users. Thanks Sridhar - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
