From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: TCP_NOSENT_LOWAT socket option Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:25:03 -0700 Message-ID: <51EEA04F.8060708@hp.com> References: <1374520422.4990.33.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <51ED9957.9070107@hp.com> <1374533052.4990.89.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <51EDBB8B.2000805@hp.com> <1374538422.4990.99.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , netdev , Yuchung Cheng , Neal Cardwell , Michael Kerrisk To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from g1t0029.austin.hp.com ([15.216.28.36]:1479 "EHLO g1t0029.austin.hp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757582Ab3GWPZG (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Jul 2013 11:25:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1374538422.4990.99.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 07/22/2013 05:13 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 16:08 -0700, Rick Jones wrote: >> By the way, does this affect sendfile() or splice()? > > Sure : Patch intercepts sk_stream_memory_free() for all its callers. > > 10Gb link 'experiment with sendfile()' : Why not the same 20 Gb (?) link you used with the other experiments? rick