linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] tcp: call tcp

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]

Message-ID: <CANn89iKXPu=RKkLop4NJWZLixE__qYV2S=PngSj6ienuvWWL8g@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 27 Jul 2018 20:38:44 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] tcp: call tcp_drop() in tcp collapse

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 8:35 PM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com> wrote:

> So what about LINUX_MIB_TCPOFOMERGE ?
> Regarding LINUX_MIB_TCPOFOMERGE,  a skb is already covered by another
> skb, is that dropping the packet or simply lowering the memory
> overhead ?

What do you think ?

If you receive two times the same payload, don't you have to drop one
of the duplicate ?

There is a a big difference between the two cases.