netdev - Re: [PATCH][net-next] LRO: improve aggregation in case of zero TSecr packets

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sun, 30 Aug 2009 22:11:05 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	opurdila@...acom.com
Cc:	themann@...ibm.com, raisch@...ibm.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][net-next] LRO: improve aggregation in case of zero
 TSecr packets

From: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 02:08:31 +0300

> This fixes a temporary performance issue we noticed in back to back
> TSO - LRO tests when such tests are run within five minutes after
> boot.
> 
> The TSval field of TCP packets is filled in based on the current
> jiffie, which is initialized at -300*HZ. That means that in 5 minutes
> after reboot it will wrap to zero.

RFC1323 says we absolutely must ignore zero TSecr values.

It is a bug that the stack emits a zero value when it means to give a
real TSecr value that will be used.

Probably we can do something like emit '1' when we would emit '0'
based upon jiffies.

And this would be an improvement from now in that having a off-by-one
TSecr in this situation is better than emitting one which we can
guarentee will be ignored.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html