[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AM4PR0501MB2723A4BC933BC4B3B2781CD5D40F0@AM4PR0501MB2723.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 19:43:46 +0000
From: Ilya Lesokhin <ilyal@...lanox.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: "davejwatson@...com" <davejwatson@...com>,
"tom@...bertland.com" <tom@...bertland.com>,
"hannes@...essinduktion.org" <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com>,
"Aviad Yehezkel" <aviadye@...lanox.com>,
Liran Liss <liranl@...lanox.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 net-next 1/6] tcp: Add clean acked data hook
>
> TLS records should be attached to skbs ?
>
> It seems more reasonable to free TLS when skb are freed, and not in
> general tcp_ack() path.
We've considered it, but then we would have to touch all the places the TCP stack splits or merges SKBs. Seems more intrusive.
>
> >
> > > 2) Since you do not pass any state here, this looks very suspicious to
> > > me.
> > >
> >
> > The state we need is the acknowledged sequence and it located in the
> socket.
> >>
> So it looks like TCP stack is bleeding all over the places ?
>
> So in the future, a change in TCP stack will have to make sure we do
> not break net/tls/... compilation.
>
> Not pretty.
I guess we could pass the ack sequence number in that callback.
Would that address the issue?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists