Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2013 20:55:22 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: emulation@freebsd.org, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Properly handle Linux TCP socket options Message-ID: <20130121205522.00006f38@unknown> In-Reply-To: <201301191126.13257.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <201301191126.13257.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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? > Also, almost all of the socket stuff in the linux.h headers appears > to be identical and at least some of it are in MI headers in Linux > (such as the TCP options). It seems to me that a lot of that should > move into linux_socket.h instead. Yes, at least for the newly added ones (I haven't looked at the other ones). Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID = B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID = 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130121205522.00006f38>