From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Nov 16 18:05:11 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA24868 for freebsd-stable-outgoing; Mon, 16 Nov 1998 18:05:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from public.bta.net.cn (public.bta.net.cn [202.96.0.97]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA24862 for ; Mon, 16 Nov 1998 18:05:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from robinson@public.bta.net.cn) Received: (from robinson@localhost) by public.bta.net.cn (8.9.1/8.9.1) id KAA26059; Tue, 17 Nov 1998 10:04:47 +0800 (GMT) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1998 10:04:47 +0800 (GMT) From: Michael Robinson Message-Id: <199811170204.KAA26059@public.bta.net.cn> To: marcs@znep.com Subject: Re: writev() to tcp Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Marc Slemko writes: >This doesn't really have anything to do with writev() in particular. There >is a bug in the TCP code where a packet bigger than a single mbuf (MLEN == >108 bytes) but not big enough for a mbuf cluster (MINCLSIZE == 204 bytes) >ends up being put into two mbufs that end up being put on the wire in two >parts. There should be some messages about it in the archives. There are >various fixes, but none has been made yet. Thanks for the information. I checked the GNATS bug database and didn't find any PR matching this bug. If someone sent a PR, would this get fixed? (The Squid FAQ has a one-line patch to uipc_socket.c.) -Michael Robinson To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message