Avinesh Kumar wrote: > Hi, > > I was looking at the delta rx-allow-jumbogram-disabling-really-20080822. > The code changes as suggested in rx_user.c, I don't believe that it > would help. > > pp->maxDgramPackets = > MIN(rxi_nDgramPackets, > - rxi_AdjustDgramPackets(RX_MAX_FRAGS, pp->ifMTU)); > + rxi_AdjustDgramPackets(rxi_nSendFrags, pp->ifMTU)); > pp->ifDgramPackets = > MIN(rxi_nDgramPackets, > - rxi_AdjustDgramPackets(RX_MAX_FRAGS, pp->ifMTU)); > + rxi_AdjustDgramPackets(rxi_nSendFrags, pp->ifMTU)); > pp->maxDgramPackets = 1; > /* Initialize slow start parameters */ > pp->MTU = MIN(pp->natMTU, pp->maxMTU); > > First of all maxDgramPackets/ifDgramPackets would get minimum of > rxi_nDgramPackets > and the return value of rxi_AdjustDgramPackets(). When -nojumbo is > specified, rxi_nDgramPackets > would be set to 1 and so will maxDgramPackets/ifDgramPackets; even if > rxi_AdjustDgramPackets() > suggests that it would fit more rx_packets. > > I believe rxi_AdjustDgramPackets() just tells number of rx_packet that > can be packed together (jumbogram) > given the MTU and has no side-effects. > > Also, just after these calculations, we are explicitly setting > pp->maxDgramPackets = 1; > > Let me know if I am wrong. I am not sure of the significance of > maxDgramPackets/ifDgramPackets, > can anyone shed some light on this. > > - Avinesh
Avinesh: Without DELTA rx-allow-jumbogram-disabling-really-20080822 -nojumbo only prevented the use of jumbograms in one direction. I believe the portion that you are missing is that -nojumbo should not only prevent me from sending jumbograms to you but that it should also prevent you from sending jumbograms to me (even if you are not using -nojumbo). The number of datagrams you are permitted to send is determined by the peer->ifDgramPackets value. Jeffrey Altman
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
