This repository was archived by the owner on Aug 11, 2020. It is now read-only.
-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 51
quic: hopefully avoid memory fragmentation issue #388
Closed
jasnell
wants to merge
1
commit into
nodejs:master
from
jasnell:hopefully-avoid-memory-fragmentation
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The PR message talks about using
NGTCP2_MAX_PKT_SIZE
but new code usesNGTCP2_MAX_PKTLEN_IPV4
is that correct? (note that the check in constructorQuicPacket::QuicPacket(const char* diagnostic_label, size_t len)
still checks forNGTCP2_MAX_PKT_SIZE
)Also,
NGTCP2_MAX_PKT_SIZE
recently changed toNGTCP2_DEFAULT_MAX_UDP_PAYLOAD_SIZE
(ngtcp2/ngtcp2@38feb91)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll double check on that. May have mentally mixed those up