netdev - Re: [2.6 patch] always export sysctl_{r,w}mem

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:52:35 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	rick.jones2@...com
Cc:	ebiederm@...ssion.com, bunk@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] always export sysctl_{r,w}mem_max

From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:46:36 -0700

> David Miller wrote:
> > If DLM really wants minimum, it can use SO_SNDBUFFORCE and
> > SO_RCVBUFFORCE socket options and use whatever limits it
> > likes.
> > 
> > But even this is questionable.
> 
> Drift...
> 
> Is that something netperf should be using though?  Right now it uses the regular 
> SO_[SND|RCV]BUF calls and is at the mercy of sysctls.  I wonder if it would be 
> better to have it use their FORCE versions to make life easier on the 
> benchmarker - such as myself - who has an unfortunate habit of forgetting to 
> update sysctl.conf :)

The force calls are for root only.

And I want to remind you that explicitly setting socket
buffer sizes hurts performance with TCP.  I know you know
this but it bears restating for the benefit of others.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html