[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1491492267.10124.79.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 08:24:27 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>
Cc: Gao Feng <gfree.wind@...mail.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/1] net: tcp: Don't increase the TCP_MIB_OUTRSTS
when fail to transmit RST
On Thu, 2017-04-06 at 10:08 -0400, Neal Cardwell wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Gao Feng <gfree.wind@...mail.com> wrote:
> > If so, we should increase the TCP_MIB_OUTRSTS too when fail to alloc skb.
> > When machine is overloaded and mem is exhausted, it may fail to alloc skb.
>
> Moving the increment of TCP_MIB_OUTRSTS to the top of
> tcp_send_active_reset() sounds fine to me.
Yes.
Keep in mind that whatever hard we try to send the packet, something
might drop it later without TCP stack knowing it.
So it is not really useful to test the immediate actions that are under
our control.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists