Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 Aug 2002 13:10:02 -0700 (PDT)
From:      Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>
To:        freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   kern/41552: TCP timers' sysctl's overflow
Message-ID:  <200208122010.g7CKA2MT097912@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/41552; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu>
To: "G.P. de Boer" <g.p.de.boer@st.hanze.nl>
Cc: freebsd-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: kern/41552: TCP timers' sysctl's overflow
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2002 15:45:22 -0400 (EDT)

 <<On Mon, 12 Aug 2002 21:21:33 +0200, "G.P. de Boer" <g.p.de.boer@st.hanze.nl> said:
 
 > Well.. since LINT says 1000Hz is advisable for dummynet use. For
 > polling 1000 or even 2000Hz is advised. IF this is a problem with
 > RFC1323, which strikes me as odd, then there's more to this problem
 > than meets the eye. A setting in LINT shouldn't break anything so
 > fundamental as TCP.
 
 RFC 1323 specifies that the timestamp clock is to have a period
 between 1 ms and 1 s.  (See page 21, third paragraph from the bottom.)
 The timestamp clock in FreeBSD is the system variable `ticks', which
 is incremented once for every clock interrupt, so its period is
 approximately 1/HZ s.  In order to support higher clock frequencies, a
 scaling factor would need to be introduced.
 
 -GAWollman
 

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-bugs" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200208122010.g7CKA2MT097912>