Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 19 Oct 2004 21:45:06 -0700
From:      Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>
To:        Andre Oppermann <andre@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys protosw.h src/sys/kern uipc_domain.cuipc_socket2.c
Message-ID:  <4175ED52.6070508@errno.com>
In-Reply-To: <41753522.1E39FEAE@freebsd.org>
References:  <200410191513.i9JFDUbf072176@repoman.freebsd.org> <417532A2.9000901@errno.com> <41753522.1E39FEAE@freebsd.org>

index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail

Andre Oppermann wrote:
> Sam Leffler wrote:
> 
>>Andre Oppermann wrote:
>>
>>>andre       2004-10-19 15:13:30 UTC
>>>
>>>  FreeBSD src repository
>>>
>>>  Modified files:
>>>    sys/sys              protosw.h
>>>    sys/kern             uipc_domain.c uipc_socket2.c
>>>  Log:
>>>  Support for dynamically loadable and unloadable protocols within existing protocol
>>>  families.
>>>
>>
>>I don't recall seeing this posted anywhere for comment.  I have some
>>concerns about this general topic and this code seems incomplete (e.g. I
>>see no locking).
> 
> 
> Locking is not needed because there are no dead moments in transitioning
> from unregistered to registered and back.  All calls to any of the protocol
> specific functions will return a valid result (even if it is only EOPNOTSUPP).
> There is no list manipulation going on.
> 
> The caller of the function is required to assure that no dangeling sockets,
> references or memory allocations are left behind after unregistering.  It's
> simply impossible to solve otherwise.  For IPDIVERT which I have converted
> this works very well (it will simply refuse to unload if a divert socket is
> open).
> 
> What remaining concerns do you have?

I went away for the day.  It seems many people have responded though not 
addressing all my concerns.  While I applaud your effort to attack this 
problem I must say I am totally disgusted by the way in which you've 
dropped this code in the tree with no review or opportunity for comment. 
  There are many decisions made here that I disagree with and from the 
subsequent commits to patchup issues it's clear your work needed some 
"soak time" before going in CVS.

	Sam


home | help

Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4175ED52.6070508>