From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Aug 29 11:30:27 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFCA71065670 for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 11:30:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F51A8FC1A for ; Mon, 29 Aug 2011 11:30:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 96410 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2011 10:19:58 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO [127.0.0.1]) ([127.0.0.1]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 29 Aug 2011 10:19:58 -0000 Message-ID: <4E5B785D.6000009@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 13:30:37 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lawrence Stewart References: <1F95A4C2D54E4F369830143CBDB5FF86@multiplay.co.uk><4E37C0F2.4080004@freebsd.org><2B063B6D95AA4C27B004C50D96393F91@multiplay.co.uk><4E3AA66A.6060605@freebsd.org><20229216858044E4881642284F245750@multiplay.co.uk> <4E432CB2.3030700@freebsd.org> <177917182AAD46A3962139F22B835B37@multiplay.co.uk> <4E5AD893.7010708@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4E5AD893.7010708@freebsd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: tcp failing to recover from a packet loss under 8.2-RELEASE? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 11:30:28 -0000 On 29.08.2011 02:08, Lawrence Stewart wrote: > On 08/14/11 23:53, Steven Hartland wrote: >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lawrence Stewart" >> >>> >>> Here's my tweaked version of Andre's patch: >>> http://people.freebsd.org/~lstewart/patches/misctcp/tcp_reass.c-logdebug%2bmissingsegment-20110811-lstewart.diff >>> >>> >> >> Still testing this and just noticed that the patch fails to >> compile when INVARIANTS is enabled. The KASSERT calls need >> ()'s around the split strings. > > oops, sorry. Compile tested on 8-STABLE without INVARIANTS enabled :/ > > Any further feedback with respect to the patch? Plan to submit it to re@ later this week for > inclusion in 9.0. I'm not sure these excessive KASSERT's are really necessary. Probably one covering those cases at the start of the function is sufficient. I was about to send the original patch to re@ for approval as well now that I'm back from vacation and fully available again. Don't mind if you do it if you've got the time. -- Andre