From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Nov 21 13:27:25 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7796737B404 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 13:27:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (out1.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net [169.207.3.119]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB06343E91 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 13:27:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from silby@silby.com) Received: from [10.1.1.6] (d69.as9.nwbl0.wi.voyager.net [169.207.132.197]) by out1.mx.nwbl.wi.voyager.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E664EE4E34; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:27:18 -0600 (CST) Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 15:33:29 -0600 (CST) From: Mike Silbersack To: Julian Elischer Cc: "David G. Andersen" , Subject: Re: Changing socket buffer timeout to a u_long? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20021121153154.M44884-100000@patrocles.silby.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, Julian Elischer wrote: > On Thu, 21 Nov 2002, David G. Andersen wrote: > > > Are there compelling reasons not to change the socket buffer > > timeout to a u_long from a u_short? This variable stores > > the number of ticks before the socket operation times out. > > > > -Dave (not on -hackers anymore, please CC) > > I can see this in -current. > In -stable I'm not sure of the ramifications. It might screw up any > proprietary loadable protocols. I Think there are a couple of them. The change sounds like a good idea, if we intend to keep socket timeouts useful. So that we don't get into binary compatibility issues with 5.0, the change should probably be made soon... Mike "Silby" Silbersack To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message