On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Larry McVoy wrote:Sounds like accept() possibly initializes slightly different socket parameters than connect() does. On the other hand, different network cards will simply have different behaviour (some due to hardware, some due to driver differences), so I hope you also switched the processes around and/or used identically configured machines (and the port configuration on switches could matter, of course, so it's really best to switch the processes around, to make sure that the *only* difference is whether the socket was set up by accept() vs connect()). Sounds like a bug to me, modulo the above caveat of making sure that it's not some hw/driver/switch kind of difference. Linus - 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
| Andrea Arcangeli | [PATCH 00 of 12] mmu notifier #v13 |
| Eric W. Biederman | Remaining straight forward kthread API conversions... |
| Eric Paris | Re: [malware-list] [RFC 0/5] [TALPA] Intro to a linux interface for on access scan... |
| Trond Myklebust | Re: Announce: Linux-next (Or Andrew's dream :-)) |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Herbert Xu | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Alexey Dobriyan | [PATCH 04/33] Fix {ip,6}_route_me_harder() in netns |
