From: Michael R. <mc...@sa...> - 2004-12-08 21:43:53
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> "Steve" == Steve Schmidtke <ste...@ho...> writes: Steve> It would be useful if daemon_user.c could be run in a Steve> synchronous mode such that packets are guaranteed delivered Steve> to the switch and guaranteed delivered to a host. The switch Steve> could then mangle packets in a deterministic fashion for Steve> testing. Yes, that would be useful. From a practical point of view: s/SOCK_DGRAM/SOCK_STREAM/ not a very useful way to operate if there is any network load, but it may be okay for regression testing. Also realize that Linux Unix domain datagram sockets are mostly reliable. (BSD does not have this property) Steve> It would also be interesting if packets could be passed in Steve> shared memory. I'm wondering if it would be faster and more Steve> reliable at the same time. On a uniprocessor, perhaps. Evidence is that on multiprocessor systems, shared memory is not faster than copying because of cache concurency costs. My opinion is that this is premature optimization. I having been thinking of booting all my UMLs up to single-user prompt, swsusp them, and restore swsusp each time instead of booting them. That may be a larger win for me. - -- ] ON HUMILITY: to err is human. To moo, bovine. | firewalls [ ] Michael Richardson, Xelerance Corporation, Ottawa, ON |net architect[ ] mc...@xe... http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/mcr/ |device driver[ ] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Finger me for keys iQCVAwUBQbd1I4qHRg3pndX9AQG/HgP7BTfeATngfiD8qffUreEmSVYgmxFM/ZYz cvS/qJjLVVghjL9Lf0KG56rOMqmVkQ47A7wE52coVLlHgXEIz0KX2j8lvuw2M3yg 4neNAulXa+yiIGf/U/GoxCe/K74cW0//tCV/Jlcl9g68AKzQ952AzEOtqy7D4hXc sdxEKTXk//4= =mf5Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |