From: Xin Long
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2016 20:00:45 +0800
> Prior to this patch, sctp defined TCP_CLOSING as SCTP_SS_CLOSING.
> TCP_CLOSING is such a special sk state in TCP that inet common codes
> even exclude it.
>
> For instance, inet_accept thinks the accept sk's state never be
> TCP_CLOSING, or
On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 10:08:03PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
> Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2016 10:25:35 -0300
>
> > On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 08:00:45PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> >> Prior to this patch, sctp defined TCP_CLOSING as SCTP_SS_CLOSING.
> >> TCP_CLOSING is such a s
From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
Date: Sat, 30 Jul 2016 10:25:35 -0300
> On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 08:00:45PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
>> Prior to this patch, sctp defined TCP_CLOSING as SCTP_SS_CLOSING.
>> TCP_CLOSING is such a special sk state in TCP that inet common codes
>> even exclude it.
>>
>> F
On Sat, Jul 30, 2016 at 08:00:45PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> Prior to this patch, sctp defined TCP_CLOSING as SCTP_SS_CLOSING.
> TCP_CLOSING is such a special sk state in TCP that inet common codes
> even exclude it.
>
> For instance, inet_accept thinks the accept sk's state never be
> TCP_CLOSING,
Prior to this patch, sctp defined TCP_CLOSING as SCTP_SS_CLOSING.
TCP_CLOSING is such a special sk state in TCP that inet common codes
even exclude it.
For instance, inet_accept thinks the accept sk's state never be
TCP_CLOSING, or it will give a WARN_ON. TCP works well with that
while SCTP may tr
