Hello! > I am not sure how much overhead is involved in maintaining the the no. of > slots left for each priority class. Also what should be the ratio of slots > that need to reserved for each class? It is an experimental value like total size of accept queue, which is also unknown apriori. No differences. > Do you think that the existing PAQ patch with SYN policing is a reasonable > way for prioritizing incoming connection requests? I still did not look at this patch, I have just got some url from netdev. (that blamed by Jamal. :-) Guys, tell your managers they should reserve a bit of money for admins to replace bogus firewalls. ibm site is really not accessible, it is not a joke. :-)). I will look at it tonight. > Preempting existing low priority connections in acceptq with high priority > ones may not be good idea as we need to abort them by sending a RST. Of course. It is _very_ bad idea. :-) Actually, true preemption can be relaized here with moving socket back to SYN-RECV state, converting it to open_request. We just pretend that we did not receive ACK, it is fully legal. But in this case we also have room for effective preemption, stopping process SYN_RECV->ESTABLISHED for low priorities. I.e. exactly, which SYN policing makes. Alexey - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
