| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Age | Files | Lines | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| * | doc: Trivial fix for reuseaddr-priority | David Gibson | 2024-07-15 | 1 | -1/+1 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | This test program checks for particular behaviour regardless of order of operations. So, we step through the test with all possible orders for a number of different of parts. Or at least, we're supposed to, a copy pasta error led to using the same order for two things which should be independent. Fixes: 299c40750137 ("doc: Add program to document and test assumptions about SO_REUSEADDR") Reported-by: David Taylor <davidt@yadt.co.uk> Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> | ||||
| * | doc: Add program to document and test assumptions about SO_REUSEADDR | David Gibson | 2024-07-05 | 1 | -0/+240 |
| For the approach we intend to use for handling UDP flows, we have some pretty specific requirements about how SO_REUSEADDR works with UDP sockets. Specifically SO_REUSEADDR allows multiple sockets with overlapping bind()s, and therefore there can be multiple sockets which are eligible to receive the same datagram. Which one will actually receive it is important to us. Add a test program which verifies things work the way we expect, which documents what those expectations are in the process. Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com> | |||||
 |
index : passt |
| Plug A Simple Socket Transport |
| aboutgitcodebugslistschat |