> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]> 
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2025 2:30 PM
> To: Chia-Yu Chang (Nokia) <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; Koen De Schepper (Nokia) 
> <[email protected]>; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
> [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 net-next 10/14] tcp: accecn: AccECN option
> 
> 
> CAUTION: This is an external email. Please be very careful when clicking 
> links or opening attachments. See the URL nok.it/ext for additional 
> information.
> 
> 
> 
> On Fri, Aug 15, 2025 at 1:40 AM <[email protected]> wrote:
[...]
> >  /* Used for make_synack to form the ACE flags */ diff --git 
> > a/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h b/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h index 
> > bdac8c42fa82..53e0e85b52be 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/tcp.h
> > @@ -316,6 +316,13 @@ struct tcp_info {
> >                                          * in milliseconds, including any
> >                                          * unfinished recovery.
> >                                          */
> > +       __u32   tcpi_received_ce;    /* # of CE marks received */
> > +       __u32   tcpi_delivered_e1_bytes;  /* Accurate ECN byte counters */
> > +       __u32   tcpi_delivered_e0_bytes;
> > +       __u32   tcpi_delivered_ce_bytes;
> > +       __u32   tcpi_received_e1_bytes;
> > +       __u32   tcpi_received_e0_bytes;
> > +       __u32   tcpi_received_ce_bytes;
> >  };
> >
> 
> We do not add more fields to tcp_info, unless added fields are a multiple of 
> 64 bits.
> 
> Otherwise a hole is added and can not be recovered.

Hi Eric,

Thanks for the feedback.

Then, would it make sense to add __u32 reserved; here or this is not an option?

Chia-Yu

Reply via email to