Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 12:14:15 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net> Cc: emulation@freebsd.org, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Properly handle Linux TCP socket options Message-ID: <201301221214.15173.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20130121205522.00006f38@unknown> References: <201301191126.13257.jhb@freebsd.org> <20130121205522.00006f38@unknown>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday, January 21, 2013 2:55:22 pm Alexander Leidinger wrote: > On Sat, 19 Jan 2013 11:26:13 -0500 John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > The current setsockopt() wrapper for the Linux ABI claims that Linux > > and FreeBSD use the same values for TCP socket options. This is true > > for TCP_NODELAY and TCP_MAXSEG but not for any other options. This > > patch adds a mapping routine for TCP options similar to that used for > > other socket option levels. I believe this mapping to be correct in > > terms of which FreeBSD options have the same semantics as Linux > > options based on comparing code in the two kernels, but I'm not 100% > > certain about TCP_MD5SIG since the Linux code that it maps to is not > > as clear (it calls some function pointer and it is not clear if it is > > accepting a simple boolean value similar to FreeBSD's). > > What about a message for unknown options? We do not do that now for any options (socket level or otherwise). You could easily add that in linux_setsockopt(), but that should be a separate commit. -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201301221214.15173.jhb>