On Wednesday 27 May 2020 21:54:18 Ujjwal Sharma wrote: > Hi Luiz! > > Thanks for your response. > > On 5/27/20 9:18 PM, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote: > > Hi Ujjwal, > > ... > > Testing is one thing but for production we would need a qualifyable > > solution, that said I wouldn't oppose to have the socket option behind > > a module options (runtime) or Kconfig (build-time) so people willing > > to run this code can do on their own. > > 1. What do you think is lacking in this solution that would make it > qualifyable for production? I believe there are multiple people in this > thread including Pali who are willing to put in the extra effort. > > 2. I'd be happy with a runtime option which would allow me to test this > as well. Have I missed something? setsockopt() solution which I described in <20200419234937.4zozkqgpt557m3o6@pali> email is already runtime option.
