Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/2] tcp: add TCP_ZEROCOPY_RECEIVE support for zerocopy receive

[Eric Dumazet]

On 04/26/2018 06:40 AM, Ka-Cheong Poon wrote:

> A quick question. Is it a normal practice to return a result
> in setsockopt() given that the optval parameter is supposed to
> be a const void *?

Very good question.

Andy suggested an ioctl() or setsockopt(), and I chose setsockopt() but it looks
like a better choice would have been getsockopt() indeed.

This might even allow future changes in "struct tcp_zerocopy_receive"

Willem suggested to add code in tcp_recvmsg() but I prefer to not bloat this already too complex function.

I will send a v3 using getsockopt() then, thanks !