On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2018-01-18 at 09:46 -0800, Tom Herbert wrote: >> >> Then that's increasing the udp_sock structure size for a narrow use >> case which will get push back. I think it's going to be better to >> stick with one sock pointer. We could maybe redefine sk_user_data as a >> pointer to an allocated structure or array so it can hold multiple >> user_data pointers (in lieu of chaining). >> > > We do not have a lot of UDP sockets per host, I do not believe it > should be a problem adding stuff in them. > Eric,
Is QUIC using unconnected sockets then? Tom
