netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 net-next 1/3] tcp: replace cnt & rtt with struct in pkts

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]

Date:	Wed, 22 Jul 2015 07:04:58 -0400
From:	Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Lawrence Brakmo <brakmo@...com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 net-next 1/3] tcp: replace cnt & rtt with struct in pkts_acked()

On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 1:46 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-07-21 at 21:21 -0700, Lawrence Brakmo wrote:
>> Replace 2 arguments (cnt and rtt) in the congestion control modules'
>> pkts_acked() function with a struct. This will allow adding more
>> information without having to modify existing congestion control
>> modules (tcp_nv in particular needs bytes in flight when packet
>> was sent).
>>
>> This was proposed by Neal Cardwell in his comments to the tcp_nv patch.
>
> Are you sure Neal suggested to pass a struct as argument ?
>
> It was probably a struct pointer instead.

Yes, I may not have specified, but I definitely agree we should pass
the struct by pointer, as the intent is that the struct may grow over
time, and we don't want to pay more overhead to copy the struct for
the call.

neal
--
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