On 14.12.2023 13:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 12:19:46PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>> Do not return if transport callback for SO_RCVLOWAT is set (only in
>> error case). In this case we don't need to set 'sk_rcvlowat' field in
>> each transport - only in 'vsock_set
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 01:52:50PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>
>
> On 14.12.2023 13:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 12:19:46PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
> >> Do not return if transport callback for SO_RCVLOWAT is set (only in
> >> error case). In this case we don
On 14.12.2023 13:29, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 12:19:46PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>> Do not return if transport callback for SO_RCVLOWAT is set (only in
>> error case). In this case we don't need to set 'sk_rcvlowat' field in
>> each transport - only in 'vsock_set
On Thu, Dec 14, 2023 at 12:19:46PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
> Do not return if transport callback for SO_RCVLOWAT is set (only in
> error case). In this case we don't need to set 'sk_rcvlowat' field in
> each transport - only in 'vsock_set_rcvlowat()'. Also, if 'sk_rcvlowat'
> is now set only
Do not return if transport callback for SO_RCVLOWAT is set (only in
error case). In this case we don't need to set 'sk_rcvlowat' field in
each transport - only in 'vsock_set_rcvlowat()'. Also, if 'sk_rcvlowat'
is now set only in af_vsock.c, change callback name from 'set_rcvlowat'
to 'notify_set_rc
5 matches
Mail list logo