Bother. CC += Andi again. On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 2:57 PM, Stephen Hemminger > <shemminger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:06:19 -0500 >> Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> Hello Stephen, >>> >>> Back in 2.6.13, you added the TCP_CONGESTION sockopt, but >>> provided no man-page patch... >>> >>> Below is my attempt to document this sockopt. Could you please >>> review. Please don't assume I've well understood the code: I >>> may well have messed up in my reading of it, so review what >>> I've written with care. >>> >>> Also, a question: was the silent truncation of the returned >>> string on getsockopt() if optlen is too small really intended? >>> Would it not be/have been better to error on this case? > > You added some other stuff below, but I got no response to the review > request and the question above? > >>> TCP_CONGESTION (since Linux 2.6.13) >>> Get or set the congestion-control algorithm for this >>> socket. The optval argument is a pointer to a >>> character-string buffer. >>> >>> For getsockopt() *optlen specifies the amount of space >>> available in the buffer pointed to by optval, which >>> should be at least 16 bytes (defined by the kernel- >>> internal constant TCP_CA_NAME_MAX). On return, the >>> buffer pointed to by optval is set to a null-terminated >>> string containing the name of the congestion-control >>> algorithm for this socket, and *optlen is set to the >>> minimum of its original value and TCP_CA_NAME_MAX. If >>> the value passed in *optlen is too small, then the >>> string returned in *optval is silently truncated, and no >>> terminating null byte is added. If an empty string is >>> returned, then the socket is using the default conges- >>> tion-control algorithm, determined as described under >>> tcp_congestion_control above. >>> >>> For setsockopt() optlen specifies the length of the con- >>> gestion-control algorithm name contained in the buffer >>> pointed to by optval; this length need not include any >>> terminating null byte. The algorithm "reno" is always >>> permitted; other algorithms may be available, depending >>> on kernel configuration. Possible errors from setsock- >>> opt() include: algorithm not found/available (ENOENT); >>> setting this algorithm requires the CAP_NET_ADMIN capa- >>> bility (EPERM); and failure getting kernel module >>> (EBUSY). > >> The tcp(7) man page is related > > (I'm a little confused by that remark: the patch at the end of my mail > was *for* the tcp(7) man page; maybe you missed that.) > >> and seems out of date as well. > > Yes, many things on it are out of date. (I've made occasional > requests to linux-net for help on this point, but have had little > response.) > >> At least on this sytem (Ubuntu 8.04).it seems to be stuck back in pre 2.6.12 > > Yes, 2.6.12 sounds about right. > >> timewarp (see tcp_bic, tcp_bic_low_window, ...) values that no >> longer exist. > > And when they disappear, no one CCs the man-page maintainer :-(. > > Anyway, thanks for the heads up > > tcp_bic* is now fixed (disappeared in 2.6.13) > and > tcp_westwood is now fixed (disappeared in 2.6.13) > and > tcp_vegas_cong_avoid is now fixed (disappeared in 2.6.13) > >> Should be updated as well. > > I'm working on it. Many updates to tcp(7) will be in man-pages-3.14. > > Cheers, > > Michael > > -- > Michael Kerrisk > Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git > man-pages online: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html > Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html > -- Michael Kerrisk Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/ git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/docs/man-pages/man-pages.git man-pages online: http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/online_pages.html Found a bug? http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/reporting_bugs.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
