Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2002 12:02:20 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: "David G. Andersen" <danderse@cs.utah.edu> Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Changing socket buffer timeout to a u_long? Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211211200420.4708-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <20021121123126.E75421@cs.utah.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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. > > At present, the maximum SO_RCVTIMEO or SO_SNDTIMEO value one > can set is SHRT_MAX / hz. With a 100Hz kernel, this comes > to about 330 seconds, but with a 1000Hz kernel or faster, > it's reduced to under 1 minute, which tends to break some > apps when running on a high-hz kernel. > > Particularly for weirdos who use HZ=10000 for dummynet purposes > and network measurement, increasing the storage to a u_long > would make life a bit happier for all sorts of code that wants > to set a 1 minute timeout. > > -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. > > -- > work: dga@lcs.mit.edu me: dga@pobox.com > MIT Laboratory for Computer Science http://www.angio.net/ > I do not accept unsolicited commercial email. Do not spam me. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0211211200420.4708-100000>