From owner-freebsd-net Thu May 11 22:44:25 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from ns1.tu-graz.ac.at (ns1.tu-graz.ac.at [129.27.2.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CE9637B983 for ; Thu, 11 May 2000 22:44:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dada@sbox.tu-graz.ac.at) Received: from localhost.tu-graz.ac.at (isdn102.tu-graz.ac.at [129.27.240.102]) by ns1.tu-graz.ac.at (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA06490; Fri, 12 May 2000 07:44:16 +0200 (MET DST) Received: (from mkamm@localhost) by localhost.tu-graz.ac.at (8.9.3/8.9.3) id HAA00444; Fri, 12 May 2000 07:43:50 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from mkamm) Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 07:43:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Martin Kammerhofer Reply-To: Martin Kammerhofer To: "Justin C. Walker" Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SO_RCVTIMEO values In-Reply-To: <200005100635.XAA00693@walkeridsl1.apple.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 09.05.00 Justin C. Walker wrote: : I pawed through the archives looking for 'SO_RCVTIMEO' and : 'sb_timeo', and couldn't find anything of interest (a lot of hits on : mail from folks at 'sb.net', tho :-}). : : Is there a reason to keep this value as a short? There's the : obvious ones of binary compatibility (for kernel plug-ins, at least), : and "that's the way it's always been done", but I don't see any good : ones. : About a year ago I suggested along with PR 11252 (now closed) to change sb_timeo from short to int. Someone stated that it's a bad idea because of size and alignment issues but I don't know how to verify that argument. (Potentially the kernel has to keep _a_lot_ of struct sockbufs, but 4 bytes extra per socket should sum up to a few KB only.) Martin To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message