netdev - Re: getsockopt(TCP_DEFER

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20100105.122903.241453878.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 05 Jan 2010 12:29:03 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi
Cc:	daniel.lezcano@...e.fr, ja@....bg, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: getsockopt(TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT) value change

From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:40:57 +0200 (EET)

> In general, I wonder if there's something that mandates that a set/get 
> pair of value should be equal?

There is no such requirement, we've been violating that premise since
day one for socket receive and send queue buffer limit socket options.

The kernel is always allowed to add fuzz or overhead adjustments to
whatever the user gives it.  If the user wants to know what the kernel
actually ended up using, it get getsockopt() to find out.
--
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