On Fri, Sep 13, 2019 at 5:29 PM Yuchung Cheng <ych...@google.com> wrote: > > What if the comment is shortened up to fit in 80 columns and the units > > (bytes) are added, something like: > > > > __u32 tcpi_snd_wnd; /* peer's advertised recv window > > (bytes) */ > just a thought: will tcpi_peer_rcv_wnd be more self-explanatory?
Good suggestion. I'm on the fence about that one. By itself, I agree tcpi_peer_rcv_wnd sounds much more clear. But tcpi_snd_wnd has the virtue of matching both the kernel code (tp->snd_wnd) and RFC 793 (SND.WND). So they both have pros and cons. Maybe someone else feels more strongly one way or the other. neal
