From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=3.0 tests=DATE_IN_PAST_03_06, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 965B8CA9EC3 for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 09:56:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D0602054F for ; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 09:56:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726913AbfJaJ4r (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Oct 2019 05:56:47 -0400 Received: from wtarreau.pck.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:10437 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726864AbfJaJ4r (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Oct 2019 05:56:47 -0400 Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id x9V4ZfqH030158; Thu, 31 Oct 2019 05:35:41 +0100 Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2019 05:35:41 +0100 From: Willy Tarreau To: Eric Dumazet Cc: "David S . Miller" , netdev , Eric Dumazet , Neal Cardwell , Yuchung Cheng , Yue Cao Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: increase SOMAXCONN to 4096 Message-ID: <20191031043541.GA30153@1wt.eu> References: <20191030163620.140387-1-edumazet@google.com> <20191031033632.GE29986@1wt.eu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.1 (2016-04-27) Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 08:46:26PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 8:36 PM Willy Tarreau wrote: > > Just a quick question, I remember that when somaxconn is greater than > > tcp_max_syn_backlog, SYN cookies are never emitted, but I think it > > recently changed and there's no such constraint anymore. Do you > > confirm it's no more needed, or should we also increase this latter > > one accordingly ? > > > > There is no relationship like that. > > The only place somaxconn is use is in __sys_listen() to cap the > user-provided backlog. > > somaxconn = sock_net(sock->sk)->core.sysctl_somaxconn; > if ((unsigned int)backlog > somaxconn) > backlog = somaxconn; OK, thanks for checking. Willy