Messages in this thread | | | From | kuznet@ms2 ... | Subject | Re: [Fwd: [Fwd: Is sendfile all that sexy? (fwd)]] | Date | Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:59:11 +0300 (MSK) |
| |
Hello!
> I'm all for TCP_CORK but it has the disavantage of two syscalls for doing the
MSG_MORE was invented to allow to collapse this to 0 of syscalls. 8)
> A new ioctl on the socket should be able to do that (and ioctl looks ligther > than a setsockopt, ok ignoring actually the VFS is grabbing the big lock > until we relase it in sock_ioctl, ugly, but I feel good ignoring this fact as > it will gets fixed eventually and this is userspace API that will stay longer).
setsockopt() exists, which does not have the flaw. (SOL_SOCKET, TCP_DOPUSH) or something like this. Actually, I would convert TCP_CORK to set of flags (1 is reserved for current corking), but I feel this operation is more generic and should be moved to SOL_SOCKET level.
BTW I see no reasons not to move BKL down for ioctl(). It is not a rocket science, plain dumb edit.
Alexey - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |