From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: is SO_PRIORITY still supposed to affect the TOS field? Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 14:52:05 -0700 Message-ID: <4E56C405.3030407@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Sender: linux-man-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org Cc: dave.taht-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, amirv-LDSdmyG8hGV8YrgS2mwiifqBs+8SCbDb@public.gmane.org, mkt.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linux-man-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-man@vger.kernel.org Amir Vadai recently sent me some patches for netperf to implement setting SO_PRIORITY. I made changes to netperf based on those patches, (now in top of trunk on netperf.org) and between some emails with me, him and Dave Taht and some quick messing around while watching tcpdump, I'm wondering if this: > SO_PRIORITY > Set the protocol-defined priority for all packets to be sent on > this socket. Linux uses this value to order the networking > queues: packets with a higher priority may be processed first > depending on the selected device queueing discipline. For > ip(7), this also sets the IP type-of-service (TOS) field for > outgoing packets. Setting a priority outside the range 0 to 6 > requires the CAP_NET_ADMIN capability. from the socket(7) manpage is still accurate because even setting a number of different values for SO_PRIORITY I didn't see the TOS field as anything other than 0 in tcpdump output (confirming something Dave Taht saw). happy benchmarking, rick jones -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html