[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1395859968.3726.32.camel@joe-AO722>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 11:52:48 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: tcp_make_synack() minor changes
On Wed, 2014-03-26 at 14:25 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2014 09:57:19 -0700
>
> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> >
> > There is no need to allocate 15 bytes in excess for a SYNACK packet,
> > as it contains no data, only headers.
> >
> > SYNACK are always generated in softirq context, and contain a single
> > segment, we can use TCP_INC_STATS_BH()
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> ...
> > - skb = sock_wmalloc(sk, MAX_TCP_HEADER + 15, 1, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > + skb = sock_wmalloc(sk, MAX_TCP_HEADER, 1, GFP_ATOMIC);
>
> Do you know where this "+ 15" comes from? :-)
> It is a kind of Linux networking trivia question.
It's really old, pre v1 days.
I presume it was some kind of ethernet minimum packet size padding.
--
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