From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: Fix comments for Nagle algorithm Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 19:54:20 +0530 Message-ID: <4EB7EA14.7000707@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <1320503003-5169-1-git-send-email-kinwin2008@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Feng King Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1320503003-5169-1-git-send-email-kinwin2008@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 11/05/2011 07:53 PM, Feng King wrote: > TCP_NODELAY is weaker than TCP_CORK, when TCP_CORK was set, small > segments will always pass Nagle test regardless of TCP_NODELAY option. > > Signed-off-by: Feng King > You have missed adding "---" after the Signed-off-by line. The tools that are used to extract the patch from the email will look for that symbol to distinguish things. [FYI, tools like git or stgit can generate your patches in the right format automatically for you.] Thanks, Srivatsa S. Bhat > diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c > index 882e0b0..a908f95 100644 > --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c > +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c > @@ -1377,7 +1377,7 @@ static inline int tcp_minshall_check(const struct tcp_sock *tp) > /* Return 0, if packet can be sent now without violation Nagle's rules: > * 1. It is full sized. > * 2. Or it contains FIN. (already checked by caller) > - * 3. Or TCP_NODELAY was set. > + * 3. Or TCP_CORK is not set, and TCP_NODELAY is set. > * 4. Or TCP_CORK is not set, and all sent packets are ACKed. > * With Minshall's modification: all sent small packets are ACKed. > */