On Fri, Apr 20, 2018 at 02:36:52AM +, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 7:02 PM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <
> marcelo.leit...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Eric,
>
> > As val may be changed to a smaller value by the line above, shouldn't
> > it assign sk->sk_rcvlowat again? Otherwise it
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 7:02 PM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <
marcelo.leit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> As val may be changed to a smaller value by the line above, shouldn't
> it assign sk->sk_rcvlowat again? Otherwise it may still be bigger
> than sk_rcvbuf.
> Say val = 512k, sysctl_tcp_rmem[
On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 10:33:35AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Applications might use SO_RCVLOWAT on TCP socket hoping to receive
> one [E]POLLIN event only when a given amount of bytes are ready in socket
> receive queue.
>
> Problem is that receive autotuning is not aware of this constraint,
> m
Applications might use SO_RCVLOWAT on TCP socket hoping to receive
one [E]POLLIN event only when a given amount of bytes are ready in socket
receive queue.
Problem is that receive autotuning is not aware of this constraint,
meaning sk_rcvbuf might be too small to allow all bytes to be stored.
Add
