Commit:     ea4f76ae13b4240dac304ed50636391d6b22e9c5
Parent:     df1b86c53dc56b1a3125b6792356066ac3af4254
Author:     Ilpo Järvinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
AuthorDate: Fri Nov 30 00:59:07 2007 +1100
Committer:  David S. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CommitDate: Mon Jan 28 14:55:10 2008 -0800

    [TCP]: Two fixes to new sacktag code
    1) Skip condition used to be wrong way around which made SACK
    processing very broken, missed many blocks because of that.
    2) Use highest_sack advancement only if some skbs are already
    sacked because otherwise tcp_write_queue_next may move things
    too far (occurs mainly with GSO). The other similar advancement
    is not problem because highest_sack was previosly put to point
    a sacked skb.
    These problems were located because of problem report from Matt
    Mathis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
    Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
    Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
 net/ipv4/tcp_input.c |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
index 97ea3ed..33d284e 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
@@ -1384,7 +1384,7 @@ static struct sk_buff *tcp_sacktag_skip(struct sk_buff 
*skb, struct sock *sk,
                if (skb == tcp_send_head(sk))
-               if (before(TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->end_seq, skip_to_seq))
+               if (!before(TCP_SKB_CB(skb)->end_seq, skip_to_seq))
        return skb;
@@ -1575,7 +1575,7 @@ tcp_sacktag_write_queue(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff 
*ack_skb, u32 prior_snd_
-               if (!before(start_seq, tcp_highest_sack_seq(tp))) {
+               if (tp->sacked_out && !before(start_seq, 
tcp_highest_sack_seq(tp))) {
                        skb = tcp_write_queue_next(sk, tp->highest_sack);
                        fack_count = tp->fackets_out;
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git-commits-head" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to