Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 18 Dec 2001 22:21:44 +0200 | From | Mika Liljeberg <> | Subject | Re: TCP LAST-ACK state broken in 2.4.17-pre2 [NEW DATA] |
| |
kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote: > > Hello! > > > from the SYN exchange (about 200 ms). So, something is wrong? > > Well, the guess was right and this is pleasant.
Yes. We also saw a case, where the RTO was quite high but not quite 120, so we got exactly one retransmission.
> The only minor :-) question remained is to guess how rto could happen > to be at this value. I will think. Well, if you have some guesses, > please, tell me.
Sorry, I'm not really trying to debug Linux so I haven't given it much thought. We're exercising retransmission algorithms with a packet loss ratio of 5% if that's any help.
> Is this intel btw?
It's ARM in little endian mode.
> I just see that other side > sends bogus misaligned tcp options... not a problem, but it can > be reason of funnyies with some probability.
Heh, they're not bogus, just differently aligned. :) This is an implementation where packet processing latency is not highest item on the list of optimization targets.
Now that you mention it, tcp_parse_options() in input.c seems to expect that the timestamps are word aligned, which is not the case here, and a false assumption in any case. I would have expected a bus error for that, unless the pointer cast generates code that magically word aligns the resulting pointer...
Cheers,
MikaL - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |