From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: way of figuring out total number of retransmitted packets on a TCP socket? Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 01:27:19 +0200 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <20041020232719.GG995@wotan.suse.de> References: <20041020130134.GC24757@xi.wantstofly.org> <20041020151448.51209278.davem@davemloft.net> <20041020223547.GJ29583@xi.wantstofly.org> <20041020155352.1c9b70f6.davem@davemloft.net> <20041020230405.GE995@wotan.suse.de> <20041020160728.1d5a337e.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Andi Kleen , buytenh@wantstofly.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: "David S. Miller" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20041020160728.1d5a337e.davem@davemloft.net> Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 04:07:28PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 01:04:05 +0200 > Andi Kleen wrote: > > > Is it really necessary? Our struct sock is already bloated enough > > as is ... If Lennert needs it for some obscure purpose it's probably > > better if he just does it locally. > > There are a couple of "__u32" holes before pointers in tcp_opt > which is the space I was going to use for this new item. On 64bit you mean? That doesn't help the 32bit challenged users. > > tcp_opt will be getting smaller some time soon as well, since > we can consolidate most of the congestion control knobs into > a single set of datums or some kind of union. ok. good. I remember the times when you made jokes about the size of TCBs in some other OSes. I bet we beat them all now in bloat, but it's good that things are shrinking again. -Andi