> Doing PUSH from setsockopt(TCP_CORK) looked obviously wrong because it isn't
> setting any socket state,
? 8)
> and also because the SIOCPUSH has nothing specific
> with TCP_CORK, as said it can be useful also to flush the last fragment of data
> pending in the send queue without having to wait all the unacknowledged data to
> be acknowledged from the receiver when TCP_NODELAY isn't set.
Andrea, TCP_CORK and TCP_NODELAY is _one_ option, which was split to two
mostly due to historical reasons. Its real name is TCP_CONTROL_NAGLING
or something sort of this, only readable. 8)
> Changing the semantics of setsockopt(TCP_CORK, 2) would also break backwards
> compatibility with all 2.[24].x kernels out there.
2nd ? 8)
Alexey
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/