[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <45fbbb23-2a23-47d0-0965-46b726832792@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 20:50:13 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Christoph Paasch <christoph.paasch@...il.com>,
"Prout, Andrew - LLSC - MITLL" <aprout@...mit.edu>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jonathan Looney <jtl@...flix.com>,
Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>,
Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
Bruce Curtis <brucec@...flix.com>,
Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
Dustin Marquess <dmarquess@...le.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/4] tcp: tcp_fragment() should apply sane memory
limits
On 7/11/19 8:26 PM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
>
> I'm aware it's not a realistic test. It was written as quick and simple
> check of the pre-4.19 patch, but it shows that even TLP may not get
> through.
Most of TLP probes send new data, not rtx.
But yes, I get your point.
SO_SNDBUF=15000 in your case is seriously wrong.
Lets code a safety feature over SO_SNDBUF to not allow pathological small values,
because I do not want to support a constrained TCP stack in 2019.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists