[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130408.152553.2156347442514600818.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 15:25:53 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: pmoore@...hat.com
Cc: eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, mvadkert@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: assign the sock correctly to an outgoing SYNACK
packet
From: Paul Moore <pmoore@...hat.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 13:22:50 -0400
> Contrary to popular belief, my goal is to not destroy the scalability and/or
> performance of our network stack, I just want to make sure we have a quality
> network stack that is not only fast and scalable, but also preserves the
> security functionality that makes Linux attractive to a number of users.
Get the violin out.
> To that end, we could put a #ifdef in the middle of
> tcp_make_synack(), but that seems very ugly to me and I think sets a
> bad precedence for the network stack and kernel as a whole.
Not an ifdef, a run time state test.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists