| To: | "'netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | setsockopt: SO_PRIORITY and IP_TOS |
| From: | Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 03 Mar 2005 17:02:48 -0800 |
| Organization: | Candela Technologies |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041020 |
With regard to 2.6.11-rc4 (and probably others). I just noticed something that struck me as a bit strange. Might be per design though... If you set the IP_TOS and then the SO_PRIORITY for a socket, the TOS is what you set it to, and so is the priority. However, if you set the PRIORITY (to 55, in my case) and then set the IP_TOS (to 3, in my case), then the priority will be re-set to 0. My opinion is that setting the IP_TOS should not affect the priority, especially if it has already been specifically set on that socket.
-- Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [BK PATCHES] 2.4.x net driver updates, Jeff Garzik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH] [NET]: Fix deletion of local addresses only varying in prefix length, Thomas Graf |
| Previous by Thread: | [BK PATCHES] 2.4.x net driver updates, Jeff Garzik |
| Next by Thread: | [PATCH] [NET]: Fix deletion of local addresses only varying in prefix length, Thomas Graf |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |