[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B76CA3B.4010206@simula.no>
Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 16:50:19 +0100
From: Andreas Petlund <apetlund@...ula.no>
To: William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@...il.com>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Ilpo Järvinen
<ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Arnd Hannemann <hannemann@...s.rwth-aachen.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, shemminger@...tta.com,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, damian@....rwth-aachen.de
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v3 3/3] net: TCP thin dupack
On 12. feb. 2010 12:19, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> Last year, I'm pretty sure I was on record as thinking this is *not* a
> good idea. But at least it now requires a sysctl to turn on, and
> should default to off.
>
> Also that naming was a bit dicey. Now the names are more descriptive,
> but the "force" is a bit overkill.
>
> How about:
> NET_TCP_FORCE_THIN_LINEAR_DUPACK -> NET_TCP_THIN_LINEAR_DUPACK
> tcp_force_thin_dupack -> tcp_thin_linear_dupack
> sysctl_tcp_force_thin_dupack -> sysctl_tcp_thin_linear_dupack
You uncovered a copy/paste/edit-typo there. The term "linear" had snuck
in even though it does not make sense for this patch. I think that
NET_TCP_THIN_DUPACK, tcp_thin_dupack and sysctl_tcp_thin_dupack will
be better.
Best regards,
Andreas
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists