On 2016-05-17 12:25, subashab@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
iptables -w 2.1
0.01s sleep, retry
0.02s sleep, retry
0.03s sleep, retry
...
2.1s sleep, exit
Note that it sleeps for 10ms and retries rather than sleeping for a
single
iteration for 2.1s seconds and then retrying.
Let me know if there are any concerns with this.
But this is changing the existing behaviour, right? My understanding
is that -w indicates the net wait time for each try.
Hi Pablo
Currently, each wait time is 1 second. -w is the overall time upto
which it has to wait.
bool xtables_lock(int wait)
{
int fd, waited = 0, i = 0;
fd = open(XT_LOCK_NAME, O_CREAT, 0600);
if (fd < 0)
return true;
while (1) {
if (flock(fd, LOCK_EX | LOCK_NB) == 0)
return true;
else if (wait >= 0 && waited >= wait) //total time upto which we
need to wait.
return false;
if (++i % 2 == 0)
fprintf(stderr, "Another app is currently holding the xtables lock;
"
"waiting (%ds) for it to exit...\n", waited);
waited++;
sleep(1); //sleep for one second only
}
}
My patch does not change the behavior of -w itself. It only changes
the sleep interval to 10ms when a decimal is specified.
Existing behavior of 1 second sleep for integral interval is preserved.
Hi Pablo
Please let me know if you have any other concerns. Also, can you tell me
if I still need to change the sleep to select.
I feel sleep / usleep should suffice here.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
