From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:59:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:59:46 -0500 Received: from minus.inr.ac.ru ([193.233.7.97]:50962 "HELO ms2.inr.ac.ru") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 18 Jan 2001 14:59:30 -0500 From: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru Message-Id: <200101181959.WAA08376@ms2.inr.ac.ru> Subject: Re: [Fwd: [Fwd: Is sendfile all that sexy? (fwd)]] To: andrea@suse.DE (Andrea Arcangeli) Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2001 22:59:11 +0300 (MSK) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20010118203802.D28276@athlon.random> from "Andrea Arcangeli" at Jan 18, 1 10:45:00 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hello! > I'm all for TCP_CORK but it has the disavantage of two syscalls for doing the MSG_MORE was invented to allow to collapse this to 0 of syscalls. 8) > A new ioctl on the socket should be able to do that (and ioctl looks ligther > than a setsockopt, ok ignoring actually the VFS is grabbing the big lock > until we relase it in sock_ioctl, ugly, but I feel good ignoring this fact as > it will gets fixed eventually and this is userspace API that will stay longer). setsockopt() exists, which does not have the flaw. (SOL_SOCKET, TCP_DOPUSH) or something like this. Actually, I would convert TCP_CORK to set of flags (1 is reserved for current corking), but I feel this operation is more generic and should be moved to SOL_SOCKET level. BTW I see no reasons not to move BKL down for ioctl(). It is not a rocket science, plain dumb edit. 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/