netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/2] tcp: fix delayed ACKs for MSS boundary condition

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2023 10:38:09 -0400
From: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>
To: Xin Guo <guoxin0309@...il.com>
Cc: Neal Cardwell <ncardwell.sw@...il.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] tcp: fix delayed ACKs for MSS boundary condition

On Thu, Sep 28, 2023, 4:53 AM Xin Guo <guoxin0309@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Neal:
> Cannot understand "if an app reads > 1*MSS data" , " If an app reads <
> 1*MSS data" and " if an app reads exactly 1*MSS of data" in the commit
> message.
> In my view, it should be like:"if an app reads and received data > 1*MSS",
> " If an app reads and received data < 1*MSS" and " if an app reads and
> received data exactly 1*MSS".

AFAICT your suggestion for tweaking the commit message - "if an app
reads and received" - would be redundant.  Our proposed phrase, "if an
app reads", is sufficient, because a read of a certain amount of data
automatically implies that the data has been received. That is, the
"and received" part is implied already. After all, how would an app
read data if it has not been received? :-)

best regards,
neal