On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Baruch Even wrote:
> [snip]
>
> > + newtp->highest_sack = treq->snt_isn + 1;
>
> That's the only initialization that you have for highest_sack, I think
> that you should initialize it when a loss is detected to the start_seq
> of the first packet that wasn't acked.
From: Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2007 00:01:46 +0200
> * David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070306 23:47]:
> > From: Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 21:42:59 +0200
> >
> > > * Ilpo J?rvinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070306 14:52]:
> > > > +
* David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070306 23:47]:
> From: Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 21:42:59 +0200
>
> > * Ilpo J?rvinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070306 14:52]:
> > > + newtp->highest_sack = treq->snt_isn + 1;
> >
> > That's the only initialization that you have
From: Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 21:42:59 +0200
> * Ilpo J?rvinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070306 14:52]:
> > + newtp->highest_sack = treq->snt_isn + 1;
>
> That's the only initialization that you have for highest_sack, I think
> that you should initialize it when
* Ilpo J?rvinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070306 14:52]:
> Complete rewrite for update_scoreboard and mark_head_lost. Couple
> of hints became unnecessary because of this change. Changes
> !TCPCB_TAGBITS check from the original to !(S|L) but it shouldn't
> make a difference, and if there ever is an R on
On Tue, 6 Mar 2007, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> because I tested this one (at least the non-timedout part worked)
...meant that timedout wasn't that throughoutly tested with such a simple
testcase I used (only FACK was tested).
--
i.
Complete rewrite for update_scoreboard and mark_head_lost. Couple
of hints became unnecessary because of this change. Changes
!TCPCB_TAGBITS check from the original to !(S|L) but it shouldn't
make a difference, and if there ever is an R only skb TCP will
mark it as LOST too. The algorithm uses some
