linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/2] tcp: fix the error count of tcpInSegs

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALOAHbCYknwreEpmn-bV0HAXmkvcXR9CH4k9GHWChS2_NP8TGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Sep 2018 18:56:33 +0800
From:   Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 2/2] tcp: fix the error count of tcpInSegs

On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 2:32 AM, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 8, 2018 at 8:14 PM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> In RFC1213, the tcpInSegs is the total number of segments received.
>> While currently it is the total number of SKBs received.
>> The number of SKBs may be not equal with the numer of segments because of
>> GRO.
>> So fix this error count.
>>
>
> We have discussed this in the past and the consensus was it was too
> late to change this.
>
> IP counters have the same issue, so after your patch, we would have
> quite a difference between transport and network layers.
>
> Adding all these max_t(u16, 1, skb_shinfo(skb)->gso_segs)) everywhere add a cost

May be we could give a comment here why we do it like this, otherwise
it may make a misunderstanding.

Thanks
Yafang