Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2015 19:08:51 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 204438] setsockopt() handling of kern.ipc.maxsockbuf limit Message-ID: <bug-204438-2472-8mZOn6Htkg@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-204438-2472@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-204438-2472@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204438 --- Comment #14 from Cameron Sparr <cameronsparr@gmail.com> --- @Alfred, thanks for the background info Re (1) do you mean that when kern.ipc.maxsockbuf gets set, scale the sb_max value up by the inverse of sb_max_adj? ie, kern.ipc.maxsockbuf * 2304 / 2048. In that case, setting kern.ipc.maxsockbuf to 1000000 bytes would actually set sb_max to 1125000 (and sb_max_adj to 1000000), making it possible to set the buffers to 1000000 bytes. Re (2), If kern.ipc.maxsockbufmeta were read/write, which of the settings would have precedence? Would you have to set maxsockbufmeta first anytime you wanted to set maxsockbuf? Or would setting maxsockbuf auto-set maxsockbufmeta?' Re Linux silent truncation: agreed, it's scary and gives the impression that setsockopt() worked, when really it didn't do anything at all -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-204438-2472-8mZOn6Htkg>