Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764849AbXLPWac (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Dec 2007 17:30:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1760904AbXLPWaW (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Dec 2007 17:30:22 -0500 Received: from mail.tmr.com ([64.65.253.246]:53381 "EHLO gaimboi.tmr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1760599AbXLPWaV (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Dec 2007 17:30:21 -0500 Message-ID: <4765AAFC.3040406@tmr.com> Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 17:47:24 -0500 From: Bill Davidsen User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.8) Gecko/20061105 SeaMonkey/1.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: David Miller CC: herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, simon@fire.lp0.eu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: sockets affected by IPsec always block (2.6.23) References: <4755A21F.2020407@simon.arlott.org.uk> <20071205001230.GA11391@gondor.apana.org.au> <20071204.223023.262159049.davem@davemloft.net> In-Reply-To: <20071204.223023.262159049.davem@davemloft.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1477 Lines: 37 David Miller wrote: > From: Herbert Xu > 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 > > 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 "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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/