RE: possible bug in latest network tree

2016-03-30 Thread Light, John J
David, I see a recent change in inet_connection_sock.c that uses sysctl_tcp_synack_retries suspiciously. Previously, sysctl_tcp_synack_retries was a global variable, and now it has been moved into the fragment (really netns_ipv4). In reqsk_timer_handler (inet_connection_sock.c) near line 563 i

Re: possible bug in latest network tree

2016-03-30 Thread Eric Dumazet
On Wed, 2016-03-30 at 21:05 +, Light, John J wrote: > David, > > I see a recent change in inet_connection_sock.c that uses > sysctl_tcp_synack_retries suspiciously. > > Previously, sysctl_tcp_synack_retries was a global variable, and now > it has been moved into the fragment (really netns_ipv

Re: possible bug in latest network tree

2016-03-31 Thread Cong Wang
On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 2:05 PM, Light, John J wrote: > > Maybe the problem is that the default shouldn't be to a TCP value, but should > be a 'transport' value. > The code is fine because net->ipv4 is always there, it doesn't depend on any CONFIG, so it is safe for dccp to use too, although I a