[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0a6839ab0ba04fcf9b9c92784c9564aa@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Date: Thu, 21 May 2020 09:06:19 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Christoph Hellwig' <hch@....de>,
Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"kuznet@....inr.ac.ru" <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
"yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org" <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
"vyasevich@...il.com" <vyasevich@...il.com>,
"nhorman@...driver.com" <nhorman@...driver.com>,
"jmaloy@...hat.com" <jmaloy@...hat.com>,
"ying.xue@...driver.com" <ying.xue@...driver.com>,
"drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com" <drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"target-devel@...r.kernel.org" <target-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-cifs@...r.kernel.org>,
"cluster-devel@...hat.com" <cluster-devel@...hat.com>,
"ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com" <ocfs2-devel@....oracle.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org" <linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org>,
"ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org" <ceph-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
"rds-devel@....oracle.com" <rds-devel@....oracle.com>,
"linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 31/33] sctp: add sctp_sock_set_nodelay
From: Christoph Hellwig
> Sent: 21 May 2020 09:35
> On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 08:39:13PM -0300, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
> > On Wed, May 20, 2020 at 04:23:55PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> > > From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
> > > Date: Wed, 20 May 2020 20:10:01 -0300
> > >
> > > > The duplication with sctp_setsockopt_nodelay() is quite silly/bad.
> > > > Also, why have the 'true' hardcoded? It's what dlm uses, yes, but the
> > > > API could be a bit more complete than that.
> > >
> > > The APIs are being designed based upon what in-tree users actually
> > > make use of. We can expand things later if necessary.
> >
> > Sometimes expanding things later can be though, thus why the worry.
> > But ok, I get it. Thanks.
> >
> > The comment still applies, though. (re the duplication)
>
> Where do you see duplication?
The whole thing just doesn't scale.
As soon as you get to the slightly more complex requests
like SCTP_INITMSG (which should probably be called to
set the required number of data streams) you've either
got replicated code or nested wrappers.
David
-
Registered Address Lakeside, Bramley Road, Mount Farm, Milton Keynes, MK1 1PT, UK
Registration No: 1397386 (Wales)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists