[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1335892244.22133.27.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 19:10:44 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
Hagen Paul Pfeifer <hagen@...u.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] netem: add ECN capability
On Tue, 2012-05-01 at 09:59 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> The concept is fine, but a couple of questions.
> 1. Why a whole u32 for boolean?
a boolean in this structure wont save space, and this file is full of
u32. Why bother ?
IMHO boolean are fine for function arguments, but in a structure, not
very helpful.
> 2. The logic in this part of netem is setup to handle case of random duplication
> combined with random loss. With ecn option set, will this code correctly
> handled a duplication combined with a loss and send one packet?
> It looks like the new code would change that behaviour.
Hmm, I'll take a look.
--
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