In light of apple's: https://developer.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2015/?id=719
I am curious if anyone has tried this new socket option in appropriate apps, (web browsers, screen sharers like tightvnc, X11, etc)? Would it be helpful in openssh/dropbear? What other sorts of apps? It looks like using it in chrome got stuck on battery life analsysis: https://code.google.com/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=310927 It does not appear to be a define in my fairly recently version of gcc, and looking at the kernel for linux it looks like "25" is correct there. it is defined to be 0x201 in OSX/ios: http://fxr.watson.org/fxr/source/bsd/netinet/tcp.h?v=xnu-2050.18.24#L217 (and now on universally in dev builds of ios) I just tossed off a quick patch for rsync, not that I have a clue as to whether it would make any difference there. diff --git a/socket.c b/socket.c index 3f5786b..bbb2461 100644 --- a/socket.c +++ b/socket.c @@ -406,6 +406,8 @@ static int *open_socket_in(int type, int port, const char *bind_addr, int af_hint) { int one = 1; + const int lowat = 16 * 1024; + int rc; int s, *socks, maxs, i, ecnt; struct addrinfo hints, *all_ai, *resp; char portbuf[10], **errmsgs; @@ -451,6 +453,12 @@ static int *open_socket_in(int type, int port, const char *bind_addr, setsockopt(s, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, (char *)&one, sizeof one); +#ifndef TCP_NOTSENT_LOWAT +#define TCP_NOTSENT_LOWAT 25 +#endif + rc = setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_NOTSENT_LOWAT, + (char *)&lowat, sizeof lowat); + if(rc != 0) { perror("lowatfailed"); } if (sockopts) set_socket_options(s, sockopts); else -- Dave Täht What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast _______________________________________________ Bloat mailing list [email protected] https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat
