Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Mar 2005 15:26:38 -0500 (EST) | From | Felix Matathias <> | Subject | Re: select() doesn't respect SO_RCVLOWAT ? |
| |
Dear Alan,
I am positive. I can setsockopt, and then, getsockopt returns the value that I requested.
Stevens very clearly states that SO_RCVLOWAT has a direct impact on select() and I assumed that this would be the case for Linux. What is the rationale for not complying with that ? Is it the micromanagement of select() that you dislike ? Isn't a significant reduction in the amount of read operations a real gain in high speed networking ?
Best Regards, Felix
On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Iau, 2005-03-10 at 21:58, Felix Matathias wrote: >> Dear all, >> >> I am running a 2.4.21-9.0.3.ELsmp #1 kernel and I can setsockopt and >> getsockopt correctly the SO_RCVLOWAT option > > The only value the code at least used to support was setting it to 1. > Are you sure you are actually setting/checking ok ? >
--
______________________________________________________________________ Felix Matathias of Columbia University, Nevis Labs
Brookhaven National Lab cell : 631-988-3694 Bldg 1005, 3-304 web : http://www.matathias.com Upton, NY, 11973 photo: http://www.pbase.com/matathias tel/fax :631-344-7622/3253 email: felix@nevis.columbia.edu _______________________________________________________________________
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |