Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2016 18:13:54 +1100 From: Lawrence Stewart <lstewart@freebsd.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r294535 - in head/sys/netinet: . cc tcp_stacks Message-ID: <56A1D6B2.1010406@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <201601212234.u0LMYpKT009948@repo.freebsd.org> References: <201601212234.u0LMYpKT009948@repo.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Gleb, On 01/22/16 09:34, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > Author: glebius > Date: Thu Jan 21 22:34:51 2016 > New Revision: 294535 > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/294535 > > Log: > - Rename cc.h to more meaningful tcp_cc.h. As a bit of historical context, the naming was intentionally protocol agnostic because it was originally hoped that the CC framework could be shared between multiple CC aware transports, and the design went to some lengths to accommodate that possibility (e.g. the ccv_container union in struct cc_var). SCTP was the obvious potential in tree consumer at the time, and other protocols like DCCP were considered as well. This hasn't come about to date, but I'm not sure what value is obtained from your rename change unless we decide to completely give up on shared CC and if we do that, this change doesn't go far enough and we can further simplify the framework to make it entirely TCP specific e.g. we should probably do away with struct cc_var. I'd argue in favour of reverting the rename and if you're gung ho about making the framework TCP specific, we can start a public discussion about what that should look like. Cheers, Lawrence
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?56A1D6B2.1010406>