On Wed, 2016-02-03 at 10:24 -0800, Alexander Duyck wrote: > If this is only meant to be a performance modification and is only > really targeted at TCP TSO/GRO then all I ask is that we use a name > like tcp_max_gso_frags and relocate the sysctl to the TCP section. > Otherwise if we are actually going to try to scope this out on a wider > level and limit all frags which is what the name implies then the > patch set needs to make a better attempt at covering all cases where > it may apply.
This is the goal. Other skb providers (like tun and af_packet) will also use this optional limit. I fail to see why Hans should send a complete patch series. We will send followup patches, as we always did. I will send the GRO change for example. So please keep a sysctl name _without_ TCP in it, it really has nothing to do with TCP.
