On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Ted Unangst <t...@tedunangst.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 09, 2014 at 21:54, Theo de Raadt wrote: > >> > A better patch is probably the following which also increases the size > >> > of the buffer to at least 64k: > >> > >> Agreed. > > > > One thing to be aware of. That function is syncronous. It will read > > as much as it can get, then it will do an "atomic" write operation to > > flush the buffer out the other way. > > > > If you have substantially different speeds, this can be a substantial > > 'buffer bloat'. > > > > Since it is handling a session in both directions... expect to see > > some substantial jaggies. > > Having convinced me this a problem (it's already in the code, but 64k > buffers will make it worse), I scaled back to 16k. > > Now soliciting diffs to change readwrite to a loop with two buffers > that poll()s in all four directions. :) > > Is using kqueue ok ? -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\
