[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200324110605.10050-1-kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2020 20:06:05 +0900
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.co.jp>
To: <edumazet@...gle.com>
CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <dccp@...r.kernel.org>,
<gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <kuni1840@...il.com>,
<kuniyu@...zon.co.jp>, <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <osa-contribution-log@...zon.com>,
<yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] tcp/dccp: Remove unnecessary initialization
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2020 11:47:17 -0700
> On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 11:22 AM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.co.jp> wrote:
> >
> > When we get a TCP_NEW_SYN_RECV/DCCP_NEW_SYN_RECV socket by
> > __inet_lookup_skb(), refcounted is already set true, so it is not
> > necessary to do it again.
>
> This changelog is absolutely not accurate.
>
> sk is a listener here.
> (because sk was set to req->rsk_listener;)
>
> Please do not add confusion by mixing different things.
>
> I prefer not relying on the old value of 'refcounted', since we
> switched sk value.
>
> Note that we call reqsk_put(req); regardless of 'refcounted'
Certainly, the refcounted has diffrent meaning in the context, sorry.
> I would rather not change this code and make future backports more complicated.
>
> Thanks.
I did not think about backports, thank you!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists