[PATCH 0/4]: Revised support for passive-close

2007-11-28 Thread Gerrit Renker
This is the revised and tested patch for supporting passive-close. Testing was impaired by a nasty bug (patch #1) which lead to the final Reset not being sent. Once that had been fixed, things worked out very smoothly. Other than that I think that the patch set has much benefited from the

[PATCH 1/4]: Use AF-independent rebuild_header routine

2007-11-28 Thread Gerrit Renker
[DCCP]: Use AF-independent rebuild_header routine This fixes a nasty bug: dccp_send_reset() is called by both DCCPv4 and DCCPv6, but uses inet_sk_rebuild_header() in each case. This leads to unpredictable and weird behaviour: under some conditions, DCCPv6 Resets were sent, in other not. The

[PATCH 4/4]: Remove duplicate test for CloseReq

2007-11-28 Thread Gerrit Renker
[DCCP]: Remove duplicate test for CloseReq This removes a redundant test for unexpected packet types. In dccp_rcv_state_process it is tested twice whether a DCCP-server has received a CloseReq (Step 7): * first in the combined if-statement, * then in the call to dccp_rcv_closereq(). The

[PATCH 2/4]: Dedicated auxiliary states to support passive-close

2007-11-28 Thread Gerrit Renker
[DCCP]: Dedicated auxiliary states to support passive-close This adds two auxiliary states to deal with passive closes: * PASSIVE_CLOSE(reached from OPEN via reception of Close)and * PASSIVE_CLOSEREQ (reached from OPEN via reception of CloseReq) as internal intermediate states.

[PATCH 3/4]: Integrate state transitions for passive-close

2007-11-28 Thread Gerrit Renker
[DCCP]: Integrate state transitions for passive-close This adds the necessary state transitions for the two forms of passive-close * PASSIVE_CLOSE- which is entered when a host receives a Close; * PASSIVE_CLOSEREQ - which is entered when a client receives a CloseReq. Here is a detailed

Re: [PATCH 1/4]: Use AF-independent rebuild_header routine

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 08:35:08AM +, Gerrit Renker escreveu: [DCCP]: Use AF-independent rebuild_header routine This fixes a nasty bug: dccp_send_reset() is called by both DCCPv4 and DCCPv6, but uses inet_sk_rebuild_header() in each case. This leads to unpredictable and weird

Re: [PATCH 4/4]: Remove duplicate test for CloseReq

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 08:35:11AM +, Gerrit Renker escreveu: [DCCP]: Remove duplicate test for CloseReq This removes a redundant test for unexpected packet types. In dccp_rcv_state_process it is tested twice whether a DCCP-server has received a CloseReq (Step 7): * first in the

Re: [PATCH 3/4]: Integrate state transitions for passive-close

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 08:35:10AM +, Gerrit Renker escreveu: [DCCP]: Integrate state transitions for passive-close This adds the necessary state transitions for the two forms of passive-close * PASSIVE_CLOSE- which is entered when a host receives a Close; * PASSIVE_CLOSEREQ -

Re: [PATCH 2/4]: Dedicated auxiliary states to support passive-close

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Em Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 08:35:09AM +, Gerrit Renker escreveu: [DCCP]: Dedicated auxiliary states to support passive-close This adds two auxiliary states to deal with passive closes: * PASSIVE_CLOSE(reached from OPEN via reception of Close)and * PASSIVE_CLOSEREQ (reached from

[PATCH 1/5] [TFRC]: Migrate TX history to singly-linked lis

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
This patch was based on another made by Gerrit Renker, his changelog was: -- The patch set migrates TFRC TX history to a singly-linked list. The details are: * use of a consistent naming scheme (all TFRC functions now begin with `tfrc_');

[PATCH 4/5] [DCCP]: Integrate state transitions for passive-close

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
From: Gerrit Renker [EMAIL PROTECTED] This adds the necessary state transitions for the two forms of passive-close * PASSIVE_CLOSE- which is entered when a host receives a Close; * PASSIVE_CLOSEREQ - which is entered when a client receives a CloseReq. Here is a detailed account of what

[PATCH 3/5] [DCCP]: Dedicated auxiliary states to support passive-close

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
From: Gerrit Renker [EMAIL PROTECTED] This adds two auxiliary states to deal with passive closes: * PASSIVE_CLOSE(reached from OPEN via reception of Close)and * PASSIVE_CLOSEREQ (reached from OPEN via reception of CloseReq) as internal intermediate states. These states are used to

[PATCH 2/5] Use AF-independent rebuild_header routine

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
From: Gerrit Renker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [DCCP]: Use AF-independent rebuild_header routine This fixes a nasty bug: dccp_send_reset() is called by both DCCPv4 and DCCPv6, but uses inet_sk_rebuild_header() in each case. This leads to unpredictable and weird behaviour: under some conditions, DCCPv6

[PATCHES 0/5]: DCCP patches for 2.6.25

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
Hi Herbert, Please consider pulling from: master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/net-2.6.25 Best Regards, - Arnaldo b/include/linux/dccp.h| 56 + b/net/dccp/ccids/ccid3.c | 57 -- b/net/dccp/ccids/ccid3.h

[PATCH 5/5] [DCCP]: Remove duplicate test for CloseReq

2007-11-28 Thread Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
From: Gerrit Renker [EMAIL PROTECTED] This removes a redundant test for unexpected packet types. In dccp_rcv_state_process it is tested twice whether a DCCP-server has received a CloseReq (Step 7): * first in the combined if-statement, * then in the call to dccp_rcv_closereq(). The latter is