On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 5:30 PM, H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Incidentally, I think there is a good reason to add a v6 packet type
> regardless, for efficiency: with packetized pipes there really is no
> point in sending a packet which is mostly padding for no good reason.
That I agree with - making a v6 that sends a minimum-sized packets,
and where the readers just always try to read the maximum size.
That said, this is not exactly something high-performance, and copying
the pointless padding to make a fixed-size packet isn't a big deal.
We're talking just 240 extra bytes or so (NAME_MAX is 255, and most
names are obviously much shorter), so I do believe that we might as
well wait unless there are other good cleanups too.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe autofs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
