netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH 09/10] [TCP]: Rewrite SACK block processing & sack_recv

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <20071119.220807.216500794.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:08:07 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 09/10] [TCP]: Rewrite SACK block processing &
 sack_recv_cache use

From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 15:44:40 +0200 (EET)

> Besides the log(n) search for which patches already exists, only O(new 
> information) scan start..end range would be necessary. Or had you 
> something else in mind (I'm not that sure what the "ideas", in plural,
> were :-))? ...I haven't forgotten the RB-tree things either (and I'm
> well aware of the limited scope of things this patch addresses).

Since you brought it up, can you respin the RB-tree patches?  Let's
just put them into net-2.6.25 and let them cook in there for a long
time.

If they prove to be too expensive in the no-loss case we can do
something like lazy tree creation or simply improving the
insert/delete implmentation.

I think it's important to put RB-tree in because a lot of the ideas
we are discussing have different implications if we go one way or
the other so we should commit to something now in order to focus
our efforts better.
-
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