Re: [1/1] connector/CBUS: new messaging subsystem. Revision numbernext.

[Evgeniy Polyakov]

On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 22:03:54 +0400
Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 12:31:58 -0500
> Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > > There may not be the same work with different data.
> > > 
> > 
> > Ugh, that really blows. Now every user of a particular message type
> > has to coordinate efforts with other users of the same message type...
> > 
> > Imability to "fire and forget" undermines usefulness of whole
> > connector. How will you for example implement hotplug notification
> > over connector? Have kobject_hotplug wait and block other instances?
> > But wait on what?
> 
> This is a simple load balancing schema.
> Netlink messages may be dropped in socket queue when 
> they are bing delivered to userspace - this is the same - 
> if work queue can not be scheduled, message will be dropped,
> but in this case userspace also can not be scheduled
> and message will be dropped.

Btw, I belive we see that it is reverse direction...
So we have reverse load balancing schema here - 
exactly like userspace socket queueing.
We basically can not sleep here - it will be DOS.

> > -- 
> > Dmitry
> > 
> 
> 
> 	Evgeniy Polyakov
> 
> Only failure makes us experts. -- Theo de Raadt


	Evgeniy Polyakov

Only failure makes us experts. -- Theo de Raadt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/