On Wed, Nov 18, 2015, at 11:47, Lorenzo Colitti wrote: > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 7:19 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa > <han...@stressinduktion.org> wrote: > > I bet there will soon be a timewaitd which handles the not configurable > > (David has rejected all those patches so far) timeout of TIME_WAIT > > sockets. And I bet it will be used. :/ > > No, SOCK_DESTROY has no effect on TCP_TIME_WAIT sockets or any other > non-full socket. > > When called on any socket where sk_fullsock(sk) is false, it returns > EOPNOTSUPP because there is nothing to do. Its purpose is to interrupt > blocked userspace socket calls, not to release resources.
Okay, thanks for clarification! Still I don't see how you enter TIME_WAIT in case you kill an active socket. At least my start-up idea timewaitd seems to be not implementable. ;) I was wondering why you didn't use tcp_close function, because still we could have the address and we would like to do a proper shutdown of the connection. While this patchset wants to tear down sockets for addresses no longer alive, it still can be used with full sockets. Thanks, Hannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
