netdev - Re: sendfile()? Re: SO_LINGER dead: I get an immediate RST on 2.6.24?

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: <20090111231859.GA8309@ioremap.net>
Date:	Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:18:59 +0300
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
To:	bert hubert <bert.hubert@...herlabs.nl>,
	"H. Willstrand" <h.willstrand@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: sendfile()? Re: SO_LINGER dead: I get an immediate RST on 2.6.24?

On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:08:24AM +0100, bert hubert (bert.hubert@...herlabs.nl) wrote:
> I fully understand. Sometimes I have to talk to stupid devices though. What
> I do find is the TCP_INFO ioctl, which offers this field in struct tcp_info:
> 
>         __u32   tcpi_unacked;
> 
> Which comes from:
> 
> struct tcp_sock {
> ...
>         u32     packets_out;    /* Packets which are "in flight"        */
> ...
> }
> 
> If this becomes 0, perhaps this might tell me everything I sent was acked?

0 means that there are noin-flight packets, which is effectively number
of unacked packets. So if your application waits for this field to
become zero, it will wait for all sent packets to be acked.

-- 
	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