On 6/14/19 7:25 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 7:04 AM maowenan wrote:
>> I agree that this is a special case.
>> I propose one point about the sequence of synack, if two synack with two
>> different
>> sequence since the time elapse 64ns, this issue disappear.
>>
>>
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 7:04 AM maowenan wrote:
> I agree that this is a special case.
> I propose one point about the sequence of synack, if two synack with two
> different
> sequence since the time elapse 64ns, this issue disappear.
>
>
On 2019/6/14 20:27, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 2:35 AM maowenan wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2019/6/14 12:28, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 6/13/19 9:19 PM, maowenan wrote:
@Eric, for this issue I only want to check TCP_NEW_SYN_RECV sk, is it OK
like
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 2:35 AM maowenan wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2019/6/14 12:28, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 6/13/19 9:19 PM, maowenan wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> @Eric, for this issue I only want to check TCP_NEW_SYN_RECV sk, is it OK
> >> like below?
> >> + if (!osk && sk->sk_state ==
On 2019/6/14 12:28, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>
> On 6/13/19 9:19 PM, maowenan wrote:
>>
>>
>> @Eric, for this issue I only want to check TCP_NEW_SYN_RECV sk, is it OK
>> like below?
>> + if (!osk && sk->sk_state == TCP_NEW_SYN_RECV)
>> + reqsk =
On 6/13/19 9:19 PM, maowenan wrote:
>
>
> @Eric, for this issue I only want to check TCP_NEW_SYN_RECV sk, is it OK like
> below?
> + if (!osk && sk->sk_state == TCP_NEW_SYN_RECV)
> + reqsk = __inet_lookup_established(sock_net(sk),
> _hashinfo,
> +
>>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c
>>> b/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c
>>> index 13ec7c3a9c49..fd45ed2fd985 100644
>>> --- a/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c
>>> +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c
>>> @@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ static void reqsk_timer_handler(struct timer_list *t)
>>>
On 2019/6/13 0:30, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:49 PM Mao Wenan wrote:
>>
>> There is one issue about bonding mode BOND_MODE_BROADCAST, and
>> two slaves with diffierent affinity, so packets will be handled
>> by different cpu. These are two pre-conditions in this case.
>>
On 2019/6/13 0:25, David Miller wrote:
> From: Mao Wenan
> Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 11:57:15 +0800
>
>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
>> index c4503073248b..b6a1b5334565 100644
>> --- a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
>> +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
>> @@
On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 8:49 PM Mao Wenan wrote:
>
> There is one issue about bonding mode BOND_MODE_BROADCAST, and
> two slaves with diffierent affinity, so packets will be handled
> by different cpu. These are two pre-conditions in this case.
>
> When two slaves receive the same syn packets at
From: Mao Wenan
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2019 11:57:15 +0800
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> index c4503073248b..b6a1b5334565 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_hashtables.c
> @@ -477,6 +477,7 @@ bool inet_ehash_insert(struct sock
There is one issue about bonding mode BOND_MODE_BROADCAST, and
two slaves with diffierent affinity, so packets will be handled
by different cpu. These are two pre-conditions in this case.
When two slaves receive the same syn packets at the same time,
two request sock(reqsk) will be created if
12 matches
Mail list logo
