[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d045271a-7380-17c8-06a2-608ff65f52ee@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 09:05:03 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: "Prout, Andrew - LLSC - MITLL" <aprout@...mit.edu>,
Christoph Paasch <christoph.paasch@...il.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jonathan Looney <jtl@...flix.com>,
Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>,
Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
Bruce Curtis <brucec@...flix.com>,
Dustin Marquess <dmarquess@...le.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/4] tcp: tcp_fragment() should apply sane memory
limits
On 7/11/19 9:04 PM, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
> I discovered we have some production services that set SO_SNDBUF to
> very small values (~4k), as they are essentially doing interactive
> communications, not bulk transfers. But there's a difference between
> "terrible performance" and "TCP stops working".
You had a copy of these patches month ago, yet you discovered this issue today ?
I already said I was going to work on the issue,
no need to add pressure on me, I had enough of it already.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists