From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1764749AbXJZXwp (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:52:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752349AbXJZXwe (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:52:34 -0400 Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:34386 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751817AbXJZXwd (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:52:33 -0400 Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:52:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20071026.165235.124016148.davem@davemloft.net> To: rick.jones2@hp.com Cc: ebiederm@xmission.com, bunk@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [2.6 patch] always export sysctl_{r,w}mem_max From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <47227C5C.1070507@hp.com> References: <472278E3.4000909@hp.com> <20071026.163958.171785530.davem@davemloft.net> <47227C5C.1070507@hp.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 5.2 on Emacs 22.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Rick Jones Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2007 16:46:36 -0700 > David Miller wrote: > > If DLM really wants minimum, it can use SO_SNDBUFFORCE and > > SO_RCVBUFFORCE socket options and use whatever limits it > > likes. > > > > But even this is questionable. > > Drift... > > Is that something netperf should be using though? Right now it uses the regular > SO_[SND|RCV]BUF calls and is at the mercy of sysctls. I wonder if it would be > better to have it use their FORCE versions to make life easier on the > benchmarker - such as myself - who has an unfortunate habit of forgetting to > update sysctl.conf :) The force calls are for root only. And I want to remind you that explicitly setting socket buffer sizes hurts performance with TCP. I know you know this but it bears restating for the benefit of others.