Em Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 01:55:11PM +0000, Gerrit Renker escreveu:
> | > @@ -788,8 +782,8 @@ static void ccid3_hc_rx_packet_recv(stru
> | > if (unlikely(hcrx->ccid3hcrx_state == TFRC_RSTATE_NO_DATA)) {
> | > if (is_data_packet) {
> | > do_feedback = FBACK_INITIAL;
> | > + hcrx->ccid3hcrx_s = payload_size;
> | > ccid3_hc_rx_set_state(sk, TFRC_RSTATE_DATA);
> | > - ccid3_hc_rx_update_s(hcrx, payload_size);
> |
> | We have to set ccid3hcrx_bytes_recv to the payload_size here too, I'm
> | fixing this on the reworked patch that introduces the RX history.
> |
> I almost did the same error again by wanting to agree too prematurely.
>
> But updating ccid3hcrx_bytes_recv is in fact not needed here and if it
> would be done it would not have a useable effect. The reason is that the
> first data packet will trigger the initial feedback; and in the initial
> feedback packet X_recv (which is ccid3hcrx_bytes_recv / the_time_spent)
> is set to 0 (RFC 3448, 6.3).
>
> For this reason, updating bytes_recv for the first data packet is also not
> in the flowchart on
> http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/notes/ccid3_packet_reception/
OK, I will add a comment on the code stating why it is not needed so
that new people don't commit the same mistake again.
- Arnaldo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
