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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 25 Dec 2012 18:35:41 +0800
From:	Yi Li <>
Subject: Why tcp_sacktag_walk specially process next_dup?

Hi Ilpo,
I am a kernel newbie, maybe this question is simple.
If you have some free time, could you help me ?

I am reading your commit;a=commitdiff;h=68f8353b480e5f2e136c38a511abdbb88eaa8ce2, 
through this code path:

tcp_sacktag_write_queue() {
     if (tcp_sack_cache_ok(tp, cache) && !dup_sack &&
             after(end_seq, cache->start_seq)) {

             /* Head todo? */
             if (before(start_seq, cache->start_seq)) {
                         skb = tcp_sacktag_skip(skb, sk, &state,
                 skb = tcp_sacktag_walk(skb, sk, next_dup,


and when we come to tcp_sacktag_walk(), comparing the current processing 
sack block
with cache, we have:  start_seq < cache->start_seq, and we now need to 
process the
bytes between (start_seq, cache->start_seq) in tcp_write_queue.

But in tcp_sacktag_walk(), why we first check the seqence space in 
next_dup ?
I know this is about D-SACK, and I have read the rfc2883, but I am still 
I have some questions:
1. Why we introduce a next_dup variable in SACK processing, is it better 
for performance optimization?
      As there is dup_sack variable, will this pre-processing of sack 
block be mixed with dup_sack ?
2. What does this test statement means in tcp_sacktag_walk:
      if ((next_dup != NULL) &&
             before(TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->seq, next_dup->end_seq)) { 
---------------------> A
             in_sack = tcp_match_skb_to_sack(sk, skb,
             if (in_sack > 0)
                 dup_sack = true;
as far as i know, if tcp_skb_pcout(skb)>1, this condition maybe exist:
        skb->seq   < current_sack_block.start_seq < 
current_sack_block.end_seq < next_dup->start_seq < next_dup->end_seq.
So, I do not understand what the code A really does.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists