Date: Fri, 12 May 2000 07:43:09 +0200 (CEST) From: Martin Kammerhofer <dada@sbox.tu-graz.ac.at> To: "Justin C. Walker" <justin@apple.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SO_RCVTIMEO values Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.10.10005120729280.412-100000@localhost.tu-graz.ac.at> In-Reply-To: <200005100635.XAA00693@walkeridsl1.apple.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.10.10005120729280.412-100000>