[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <edbe602e-40ae-3f1e-8abd-a6c36b306865@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2019 16:28:02 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Oliver Herms <oliver.peter.herms@...il.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: ip/tnl: Set iph->id only when don't fragment is
not set
On 11/26/19 3:32 PM, Oliver Herms wrote:
> Using a simple incrementation here, as with sockets, would solve my problem well enough.
>
I have to ask : Are you aware that linux is SMP OS ?
If on a mostly idle host, two packets need a different ID, using a " simple incrementation"
wont fit the need.
sockets are protected against concurrent increments by their lock.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists