Re: [PATCH net] sctp: change to save MSG_MORE flag into assoc

2017-03-07 Thread Xin Long
On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Xin Long wrote: > On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Xin Long wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 12:31 AM, David Laight >> wrote: >>> From: Xin Long Sent: 03 March 2017 15:43 >>> ... > It is much more important to get MSG_MORE working 'properly' for SCTP >>

Re: [PATCH net] sctp: change to save MSG_MORE flag into assoc

2017-03-03 Thread Xin Long
On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 1:57 AM, Xin Long wrote: > On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 12:31 AM, David Laight wrote: >> From: Xin Long >>> Sent: 03 March 2017 15:43 >> ... >>> > It is much more important to get MSG_MORE working 'properly' for SCTP >>> > than for TCP. For TCP an application can always use a lon

Re: [PATCH net] sctp: change to save MSG_MORE flag into assoc

2017-03-03 Thread Xin Long
On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 12:31 AM, David Laight wrote: > From: Xin Long >> Sent: 03 March 2017 15:43 > ... >> > It is much more important to get MSG_MORE working 'properly' for SCTP >> > than for TCP. For TCP an application can always use a long send. > >> "long send" ?, you mean bigger data, or kee

RE: [PATCH net] sctp: change to save MSG_MORE flag into assoc

2017-03-03 Thread David Laight
From: Xin Long > Sent: 03 March 2017 15:43 ... > > It is much more important to get MSG_MORE working 'properly' for SCTP > > than for TCP. For TCP an application can always use a long send. > "long send" ?, you mean bigger data, or keeping sending? > I didn't get the difference between SCTP and TC

Re: [PATCH net] sctp: change to save MSG_MORE flag into assoc

2017-03-03 Thread Xin Long
On Fri, Mar 3, 2017 at 8:49 PM, David Laight wrote: > From: Xin Long >> Sent: 03 March 2017 06:24 >> David Laight noticed the support for MSG_MORE with datamsg->force_day >> didn't really work as we expected, as the first msg with MSG_MORE set >> would always block the following chunks' dequeuing.

RE: [PATCH net] sctp: change to save MSG_MORE flag into assoc

2017-03-03 Thread David Laight
From: Xin Long > Sent: 03 March 2017 06:24 > David Laight noticed the support for MSG_MORE with datamsg->force_day > didn't really work as we expected, as the first msg with MSG_MORE set > would always block the following chunks' dequeuing. > > This Patch is to rewrite it by saving the MSG_MORE fl

[PATCH net] sctp: change to save MSG_MORE flag into assoc

2017-03-02 Thread Xin Long
David Laight noticed the support for MSG_MORE with datamsg->force_day didn't really work as we expected, as the first msg with MSG_MORE set would always block the following chunks' dequeuing. This Patch is to rewrite it by saving the MSG_MORE flag into assoc as Divid Laight suggested. asoc->force