Message ID | 20091023111336.4733.4901.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain |
---|---|
State | RFC, archived |
Delegated to: | David Miller |
Headers | show |
From: Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@in.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:43:36 +0530 > Performance: I ran netperf UDPv6 RR to use connected sockets. > Tested with a 70 min run, aggregate of 5 netperf runs for > each result. Who actually uses connected UDP sockets? :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
David Miller wrote on 10/24/2009 07:10:10 PM: > > > Performance: I ran netperf UDPv6 RR to use connected sockets. > > Tested with a 70 min run, aggregate of 5 netperf runs for > > each result. > > Who actually uses connected UDP sockets? :-) Just something I found when running netperf RR tests, and the code is there doing it anyway. Maybe I can drop doing this testing, but upto you. Thanks, - KK -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
From: Krishna Kumar2 <krkumar2@in.ibm.com> Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 19:15:46 +0530 > David Miller wrote on 10/24/2009 07:10:10 PM: >> >> > Performance: I ran netperf UDPv6 RR to use connected sockets. >> > Tested with a 70 min run, aggregate of 5 netperf runs for >> > each result. >> >> Who actually uses connected UDP sockets? :-) > > Just something I found when running netperf RR tests, and the code is there > doing it anyway. Maybe I can drop doing this testing, but upto you. Eric Dumazet or someone else made comments recently about how nobody uses connected UDP sockets. And if someone actually does, they can complain and we can go back to looking into it :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote on 10/24/2009 07:19:15 PM: > > >> Who actually uses connected UDP sockets? :-) > > > > Just something I found when running netperf RR tests, and the code is there > > doing it anyway. Maybe I can drop doing this testing, but upto you. > > Eric Dumazet or someone else made comments recently about how > nobody uses connected UDP sockets. > > And if someone actually does, they can complain and we can > go back to looking into it :-) Agreed. Please drop it. Thanks, - KK -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
David Miller wrote: > From: Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@in.ibm.com> > Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 16:43:36 +0530 > > >>Performance: I ran netperf UDPv6 RR to use connected sockets. >>Tested with a 70 min run, aggregate of 5 netperf runs for >>each result. > > > Who actually uses connected UDP sockets? :-) Somebody must, they sent me patches to optionally connect() the endpoints in a UDP_RR test :) rick jones trying to decide if he should by default set SO_DONTROUTE on UDP sockets to cover the backsides of testers who cause link-down events on devices under test with systems connected to their employer's site lans with the default route pointing at same... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff -ruNp org/net/ipv6/udp.c new/net/ipv6/udp.c --- org/net/ipv6/udp.c 2009-10-19 11:58:16.000000000 +0530 +++ new/net/ipv6/udp.c 2009-10-23 10:42:35.000000000 +0530 @@ -990,7 +990,8 @@ do_append_data: if (dst) { if (connected) { - ip6_dst_store(sk, dst, + if (__sk_dst_get(sk) != dst) + ip6_dst_store(sk, dst, ipv6_addr_equal(&fl.fl6_dst, &np->daddr) ? &np->daddr : NULL, #ifdef CONFIG_IPV6_SUBTREES