netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: better handle TCP_TX

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]

Message-ID: <CANn89iL0ZjuH-YiuBbm2+s_2adQzVUVOi4VYDvwGBXjTBYHb=A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 09:16:23 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>, 
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: better handle TCP_TX_DELAY on established flows

On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 9:06 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Oct 2025 02:40:39 -0700 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > What about using a nf rule to drop all the 'tun0' egress packet, instead
> > > of a qdisc?
> > >
> > > In any case I think the pending patches should be ok.
> >
> > Or add a best effort, so that TCP can have some clue, vast majority of
> > cases is that the batch is 1 skb :)
>
> FWIW I don't see an official submission and CI is quite behind
> so I'll set the test to ignored for now.

You mean this TCP_TX_DELAY patch ? Or the series ?

I will send V2 of the series soon.  (I added the test unflake in it)