Re: Is kernel 2.6.11 adjust tcp_max_syn_backlog incorrectly?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Skywind <[email protected]> writes:
>
> It seems that kernel don't adjust these value automatic, is this a bug?
>
> I guess the mechanism of tcp.c in 2.6.11 have some changes(between
> 2.6.10), and it conduce to this result,
> Is this guess correctly?

Yes, there were some changes here when it was converted to a common
function for all hash tables (alloc_large_system_hash - the function
with the argument list from hell).  Anyways, here's a quick fix.

DaveM for your consideration.

Adjust TCP mem order check to new alloc_large_system_hash

Signed-off-by: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>

--- linux-2.6.11-work/net/ipv4/tcp.c~	2005-03-02 08:37:51.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.11-work/net/ipv4/tcp.c	2005-06-11 12:16:22.000000000 +0200
@@ -2337,7 +2337,7 @@
 			(tcp_bhash_size * sizeof(struct tcp_bind_hashbucket));
 			order++)
 		;
-	if (order > 4) {
+	if (order >= 4) {
 		sysctl_local_port_range[0] = 32768;
 		sysctl_local_port_range[1] = 61000;
 		sysctl_tcp_max_tw_buckets = 180000;



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux