On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 03:18:38PM +0100, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 21, 2025 at 01:07 PM +08, Jiayuan Chen wrote:
> > 'sk->copied_seq' was updated in the tcp_eat_skb() function when the
> > action of a BPF program was SK_REDIRECT. For other actions, like SK_PASS,
> > the update logic for 'sk->copied_seq' was moved to
> > tcp_bpf_recvmsg_parser() to ensure the accuracy of the 'fionread' feature.
> >
> > It works for a single stream_verdict scenario, as it also modified
> > 'sk_data_ready->sk_psock_verdict_data_ready->tcp_read_skb'
> > to remove updating 'sk->copied_seq'.
> >
> > However, for programs where both stream_parser and stream_verdict are
> > active(strparser purpose), tcp_read_sock() was used instead of
>
> Nit: missing space, "active (strparser purpose)"
> ^
>
> > tcp_read_skb() (sk_data_ready->strp_data_ready->tcp_read_sock)
>
> Nit: missing period, "… (sk_data_ready->strp_data_ready->tcp_read_sock)."
> ^
>
> > tcp_read_sock() now still update 'sk->copied_seq', leading to duplicated
>
> Nit: grammar "still updates"
> ^
> Please run commit descriptions through a language tool or an LLM, if
> possible. This makes reviewing easier.
>
Thanks Jakub, I'll review all commit messages and code comments, and also
use LLLM for grammar checks.
