From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Petlund Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v3 3/3] net: TCP thin dupack Date: Sat, 13 Feb 2010 16:50:19 +0100 Message-ID: <4B76CA3B.4010206@simula.no> References: <4B73F31F.9000204@simula.no> <4B753943.2080800@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , =?UTF-8?B?SWxwbyBK?= =?UTF-8?B?w6RydmluZW4=?= , Eric Dumazet , Arnd Hannemann , LKML , shemminger@vyatta.com, David Miller , damian@tvk.rwth-aachen.de To: William Allen Simpson Return-path: Received: from mail.2750.no ([62.101.244.198]:59382 "EHLO mail.2750.no" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757261Ab0BMP6M (ORCPT ); Sat, 13 Feb 2010 10:58:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B753943.2080800@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12. feb. 2010 12:19, William Allen Simpson wrote: > Last year, I'm pretty sure I was on record as thinking this is *not* a > good idea. But at least it now requires a sysctl to turn on, and > should default to off. > > Also that naming was a bit dicey. Now the names are more descriptive, > but the "force" is a bit overkill. > > How about: > NET_TCP_FORCE_THIN_LINEAR_DUPACK -> NET_TCP_THIN_LINEAR_DUPACK > tcp_force_thin_dupack -> tcp_thin_linear_dupack > sysctl_tcp_force_thin_dupack -> sysctl_tcp_thin_linear_dupack You uncovered a copy/paste/edit-typo there. The term "linear" had snuck in even though it does not make sense for this patch. I think that NET_TCP_THIN_DUPACK, tcp_thin_dupack and sysctl_tcp_thin_dupack will be better. Best regards, Andreas