[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4EB7EA14.7000707@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2011 19:54:20 +0530
From: "Srivatsa S. Bhat" <srivatsa.bhat@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Feng King <kinwin2008@...il.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: Fix comments for Nagle algorithm
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 <kinwin2008@...il.com>
>
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.
> */
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists