netdev - Re: [PATCH 6/8] tcp: Add GRO support

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: <20081213031019.GE807@ioremap.net>
Date:	Sat, 13 Dec 2008 06:10:19 +0300
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] tcp: Add GRO support

On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 01:46:45PM +1100, Herbert Xu (herbert@...dor.apana.org.au) wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 05:40:46AM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> >
> > So it will fail if timestamp changed? Or if some new option added?
> 
> Correct, it must remain exactly the same.  Even at 100Mbps any
> sane clock frequency will result in an average of 8 packets per
> clock update.  At the sort speeds (>1Gbps) at which we're targetting
> this'll easily get us to 64K which is our maximum (actually it
> looks like I forgot to add a check to stop this from growing beyond
> 64K :)

Some stacks use just increased counter since it is allowed by the RFC :)
Probably 'not sane' is appropriate name, but still... Probably not a
serious problem, but what if just check the timestamp option before/after
like it was in LRO?

-- 
	Evgeniy Polyakov
--
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