[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CADxym3aV9hy3UdnVWnLeLF6BnwqqrJ1MdMKNQiSa4sCWQ2+4ng@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 21:28:11 +0800
From: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com>
To: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, christian.brauner@...ntu.com,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
Menglong Dong <dong.menglong@....com.cn>, daniel@...earbox.net,
gnault@...hat.com, ast@...nel.org,
Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
ap420073@...il.com, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, jakub@...udflare.com,
bjorn.topel@...el.com, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, rdna@...com,
Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] net: core: Namespace-ify sysctl_rmem_max and sysctl_wmem_max
Hello~
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 6:46 PM Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de> wrote:
>
> >
> > For that reason, make sysctl_wmem_max and sysctl_rmem_max
> > per-namespace.
>
> I think having those values be restricted by init netns is a desirable
> property.
I just thought that having these values per-namespace can be more flexible,
and users can have more choices. Is there any bad influence that I didn't
realize?
Thanks~
Menglong Dong
Powered by blists - more mailing lists