Re: 2.1.111 VM and low memory machines

David S. Miller (
Mon, 27 Jul 1998 03:35:56 -0700

From: (Alan Cox)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 11:26:06 +0100 (BST)

> If you want large windows in 2.1.x, then try to convince DaveM and whomever
> else has a say in this that it doesn't break stuff. I have sysctl patches
> that allow up to 64k windows (without scaling) which I find work great over
> satellite, but I'm told windows over 32k break buggy stacks.

Some people have sign extension problems. Right now those are getting
pretty rare (they were almost entirely DOS stacks). Dave's call but I dont
have a problem with taking that one out for 2.2

I'm not making this change.

If you want large windows talk to a host who speaks window scaling,
this is what it's there for. Otherwise all bets are off for >32k
windows. (I have real life experience with the sign extension
problems, I did try to enable 64k windows without scaling by default
once and I hit too many machines which wouldn't talk to me properly)

It's getting too close to the 2.2.x wire now for these sorts of itty
bitty things, let's work on the higher priority problems instead so we
can get a clean stable release out soon.

(I'm soon going to be asking people to start reporting TCP performance
and behavior anomalies to me again, I just submitted a sync-up patch
to Linus with all my latest networking fixes etc. so when he releases
a kernel with that stuff in there, fire away)

David S. Miller

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at