Hello Matthieu,
On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 6:02 PM Matthieu Baerts <matt...@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Jason,
>
> On 23/04/2024 09:21, Jason Xing wrote:
> > From: Jason Xing <kernelx...@tencent.com>
> >
> > It relys on what reset options in the skb are as rfc8684 says. Reusing
>
> (if you have something else to fix, 'checkpatch.pl --codespell' reported
> a warning here: s/relys/relies/)
Thanks. Will fix it.
>
> > this logic can save us much energy. This patch replaces most of the prior
> > NOT_SPECIFIED reasons.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kernelx...@tencent.com>
> > ---
> > net/mptcp/protocol.h | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > net/mptcp/subflow.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++-----
> > 2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/mptcp/protocol.h b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
> > index fdfa843e2d88..bbcb8c068aae 100644
> > --- a/net/mptcp/protocol.h
> > +++ b/net/mptcp/protocol.h
> > @@ -581,6 +581,34 @@ mptcp_subflow_ctx_reset(struct mptcp_subflow_context
> > *subflow)
> > WRITE_ONCE(subflow->local_id, -1);
> > }
> >
> > +/* Convert reset reasons in MPTCP to enum sk_rst_reason type */
> > +static inline enum sk_rst_reason
> > +sk_rst_convert_mptcp_reason(u32 reason)
> > +{
> > + switch (reason) {
> > + case MPTCP_RST_EUNSPEC:
> > + return SK_RST_REASON_MPTCP_RST_EUNSPEC;
> > + case MPTCP_RST_EMPTCP:
> > + return SK_RST_REASON_MPTCP_RST_EMPTCP;
> > + case MPTCP_RST_ERESOURCE:
> > + return SK_RST_REASON_MPTCP_RST_ERESOURCE;
> > + case MPTCP_RST_EPROHIBIT:
> > + return SK_RST_REASON_MPTCP_RST_EPROHIBIT;
> > + case MPTCP_RST_EWQ2BIG:
> > + return SK_RST_REASON_MPTCP_RST_EWQ2BIG;
> > + case MPTCP_RST_EBADPERF:
> > + return SK_RST_REASON_MPTCP_RST_EBADPERF;
> > + case MPTCP_RST_EMIDDLEBOX:
> > + return SK_RST_REASON_MPTCP_RST_EMIDDLEBOX;
> > + default:
> > + /**
>
> I guess here as well, it should be '/*' instead of '/**'. But I guess
> that's fine, this file is probably not scanned. Anyway, if you have to
> send a new version, please fix this as well.
Thanks for your help. I will.
>
> (Also, this helper might require '#include <net/rstreason.h>', but our
> CI is fine with it, it is also added in the next commit, and probably
> already included via include/net/request_sock.h. So I guess that's fine.)
Yes, If I need to submit the V9 patch, I will move it.
>
>
> Other than that, it looks good to me:
>
> Reviewed-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matt...@kernel.org>
Thanks for all the reviews :)
Thanks,
Jason
>
> Cheers,
> Matt
> --
> Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.
>
