From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org  Wed Oct 21 12:07:39 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 055E1A1A7AC
 for <freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:07:39 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from white_knight@2ch.net)
Received: from mail.nttec.com (mail.nttec.com [207.29.234.10])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7AC61A2
 for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>; Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:07:38 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from white_knight@2ch.net)
Received: from mail.nttec.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by mail.nttec.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id B6315140EC4;
 Wed, 21 Oct 2015 04:51:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 19:51:43 +0800
From: White Knight <white_knight@2ch.net>
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com>
Cc: freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: The kern.ipc.somaxconn limit revisited.
Organization: 2ch.net
In-Reply-To: <40010d0d47a24789523d90623b15da30@2ch.net>
References: <ddc130c96b7b76ed22fb582b701a86f4@2ch.net>
 <CAJ-Vmo=MKz7s6VWBUpjOY16J4KVv-hj3oQX4JOEvP2Do+9A5UQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <40010d0d47a24789523d90623b15da30@2ch.net>
Message-ID: <204daedda1bf2a9a647f15fe97b5cbcc@2ch.net>
X-Sender: white_knight@2ch.net
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.1.3
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 12:07:39 -0000

On 2015-10-13 01:32, White Knight wrote:
> On 2015-10-10 02:47, Adrian Chadd wrote:
>> I think it's worth upping to an int type, so we can eventually up it 
>> to > 64k.
>> 
>> Please do submit diffs for revie.w :)
> 
> I'll work on the patch this week, thank you.

I have submitted a bug report, with a patch for review, at

   https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=203922

I chose the arbitrary limit of 1431655765 in order to prevent an 
overflow (on systems where u_int is 32bit).

I'm somewhat unsure if my changes to struct xsctp_inpcb are ok.  Is it 
better to use the reserved fields?  And if I don't, like in my patch, is 
it better to shorten the reserved fields accordingly?

I decided not to touch other parts of the netstat formatted output, 
mostly to keep the patch short and to the point.

Please comment and let me know what else needs to be changed.

Are there other userland programs that touch the xsocket and xsctp_inpcb 
interfaces than netstat?

-- 
White Knight

I'm not from 2ch.net, I just work there.