On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 08:01:24AM +0100, Matija Glavinic Pecotic wrote:
> Implementation of (a)rwnd calculation might lead to severe performance issues
> and associations completely stalling. These problems are described and solution
> is proposed which improves lksctp's robustness in congestion state.
>
> 1) Sudden drop of a_rwnd and incomplete window recovery afterwards
>
> Data accounted in sctp_assoc_rwnd_decrease takes only payload size (sctp data),
> but size of sk_buff, which is blamed against receiver buffer, is not accounted
> in rwnd. Theoretically, this should not be the problem as actual size of buffer
> is double the amount requested on the socket (SO_RECVBUF). Problem here is
> that this will have bad scaling for data which is less then sizeof sk_buff.
> E.g. in 4G (LTE) networks, link interfacing radio side will have a large portion
> of traffic of this size (less then 100B).
>
> An example of sudden drop and incomplete window recovery is given below. Node B
> exhibits problematic behavior. Node A initiates association and B is configured
> to advertise rwnd of 10000. A sends messages of size 43B (size of typical sctp
> message in 4G (LTE) network). On B data is left in buffer by not reading socket
> in userspace.
>
> Lets examine when we will hit pressure state and declare rwnd to be 0 for
> scenario with above stated parameters (rwnd == 10000, chunk size == 43, each
> chunk is sent in separate sctp packet)
>
> Logic is implemented in sctp_assoc_rwnd_decrease:
>
> socket_buffer (see below) is maximum size which can be held in socket buffer
> (sk_rcvbuf). current_alloced is amount of data currently allocated (rx_count)
>
> A simple expression is given for which it will be examined after how many
> packets for above stated parameters we enter pressure state:
>
> We start by condition which has to be met in order to enter pressure state:
>
> socket_buffer < currently_alloced;
>
> currently_alloced is represented as size of sctp packets received so far and not
> yet delivered to userspace. x is the number of chunks/packets (since there is no
> bundling, and each chunk is delivered in separate packet, we can observe each
> chunk also as sctp packet, and what is important here, having its own sk_buff):
>
> socket_buffer < x*each_sctp_packet;
>
> each_sctp_packet is sctp chunk size + sizeof(struct sk_buff). socket_buffer is
> twice the amount of initially requested size of socket buffer, which is in case
> of sctp, twice the a_rwnd requested:
>
> 2*rwnd < x*(payload+sizeof(struc sk_buff));
>
> sizeof(struct sk_buff) is 190 (3.13.0-rc4+). Above is stated that rwnd is 10000
> and each payload size is 43
>
> 20000 < x(43+190);
>
> x > 20000/233;
>
> x ~> 84;
>
> After ~84 messages, pressure state is entered and 0 rwnd is advertised while
> received 84*43B ~= 3612B sctp data. This is why external observer notices sudden
> drop from 6474 to 0, as it will be now shown in example:
>
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [INIT] [init tag: 1875509148] [rwnd: 81920] [OS: 10] [MIS: 65535] [init TSN: 1096057017]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [INIT ACK] [init tag: 3198966556] [rwnd: 10000] [OS: 10] [MIS: 10] [init TSN: 902132839]
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [COOKIE ECHO]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [COOKIE ACK]
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 1096057017] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 0] [PPID 0x18]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057017] [a_rwnd 9957] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 1096057018] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 1] [PPID 0x18]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057018] [a_rwnd 9957] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 1096057019] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 2] [PPID 0x18]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057019] [a_rwnd 9914] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> <...>
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 1096057098] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 81] [PPID 0x18]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057098] [a_rwnd 6517] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 1096057099] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 82] [PPID 0x18]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057099] [a_rwnd 6474] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 1096057100] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 83] [PPID 0x18]
>
> --> Sudden drop
>
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057100] [a_rwnd 0] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> At this point, rwnd_press stores current rwnd value so it can be later restored
> in sctp_assoc_rwnd_increase. This however doesn't happen as condition to start
> slowly increasing rwnd until rwnd_press is returned to rwnd is never met. This
> condition is not met since rwnd, after it hit 0, must first reach rwnd_press by
> adding amount which is read from userspace. Let us observe values in above
> example. Initial a_rwnd is 10000, pressure was hit when rwnd was ~6500 and the
> amount of actual sctp data currently waiting to be delivered to userspace
> is ~3500. When userspace starts to read, sctp_assoc_rwnd_increase will be blamed
> only for sctp data, which is ~3500. Condition is never met, and when userspace
> reads all data, rwnd stays on 3569.
>
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057100] [a_rwnd 1505] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057100] [a_rwnd 3010] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 1096057101] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 84] [PPID 0x18]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057101] [a_rwnd 3569] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> --> At this point userspace read everything, rwnd recovered only to 3569
>
> IP A.34340 > B.12345: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 1096057102] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 85] [PPID 0x18]
> IP B.12345 > A.34340: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 1096057102] [a_rwnd 3569] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> Reproduction is straight forward, it is enough for sender to send packets of
> size less then sizeof(struct sk_buff) and receiver keeping them in its buffers.
>
> 2) Minute size window for associations sharing the same socket buffer
>
> In case multiple associations share the same socket, and same socket buffer
> (sctp.rcvbuf_policy == 0), different scenarios exist in which congestion on one
> of the associations can permanently drop rwnd of other association(s).
>
> Situation will be typically observed as one association suddenly having rwnd
> dropped to size of last packet received and never recovering beyond that point.
> Different scenarios will lead to it, but all have in common that one of the
> associations (let it be association from 1)) nearly depleted socket buffer, and
> the other association blames socket buffer just for the amount enough to start
> the pressure. This association will enter pressure state, set rwnd_press and
> announce 0 rwnd.
> When data is read by userspace, similar situation as in 1) will occur, rwnd will
> increase just for the size read by userspace but rwnd_press will be high enough
> so that association doesn't have enough credit to reach rwnd_press and restore
> to previous state. This case is special case of 1), being worse as there is, in
> the worst case, only one packet in buffer for which size rwnd will be increased.
> Consequence is association which has very low maximum rwnd ('minute size', in
> our case down to 43B - size of packet which caused pressure) and as such
> unusable.
>
> Scenario happened in the field and labs frequently after congestion state (link
> breaks, different probabilities of packet drop, packet reordering) and with
> scenario 1) preceding. Here is given a deterministic scenario for reproduction:
>
> From node A establish two associations on the same socket, with rcvbuf_policy
> being set to share one common buffer (sctp.rcvbuf_policy == 0). On association 1
> repeat scenario from 1), that is, bring it down to 0 and restore up. Observe
> scenario 1). Use small payload size (here we use 43). Once rwnd is 'recovered',
> bring it down close to 0, as in just one more packet would close it. This has as
> a consequence that association number 2 is able to receive (at least) one more
> packet which will bring it in pressure state. E.g. if association 2 had rwnd of
> 10000, packet received was 43, and we enter at this point into pressure,
> rwnd_press will have 9957. Once payload is delivered to userspace, rwnd will
> increase for 43, but conditions to restore rwnd to original state, just as in
> 1), will never be satisfied.
>
> --> Association 1, between A.y and B.12345
>
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [INIT] [init tag: 836880897] [rwnd: 10000] [OS: 10] [MIS: 65535] [init TSN: 4032536569]
> IP B.12345 > A.55915: sctp (1) [INIT ACK] [init tag: 2873310749] [rwnd: 81920] [OS: 10] [MIS: 10] [init TSN: 3799315613]
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [COOKIE ECHO]
> IP B.12345 > A.55915: sctp (1) [COOKIE ACK]
>
> --> Association 2, between A.z and B.12346
>
> IP A.55915 > B.12346: sctp (1) [INIT] [init tag: 534798321] [rwnd: 10000] [OS: 10] [MIS: 65535] [init TSN: 2099285173]
> IP B.12346 > A.55915: sctp (1) [INIT ACK] [init tag: 516668823] [rwnd: 81920] [OS: 10] [MIS: 10] [init TSN: 3676403240]
> IP A.55915 > B.12346: sctp (1) [COOKIE ECHO]
> IP B.12346 > A.55915: sctp (1) [COOKIE ACK]
>
> --> Deplete socket buffer by sending messages of size 43B over association 1
>
> IP B.12345 > A.55915: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 3799315613] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 0] [PPID 0x18]
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3799315613] [a_rwnd 9957] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> <...>
>
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3799315696] [a_rwnd 6388] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP B.12345 > A.55915: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 3799315697] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 84] [PPID 0x18]
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3799315697] [a_rwnd 6345] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> --> Sudden drop on 1
>
> IP B.12345 > A.55915: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 3799315698] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 85] [PPID 0x18]
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3799315698] [a_rwnd 0] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> --> Here userspace read, rwnd 'recovered' to 3698, now deplete again using
> association 1 so there is place in buffer for only one more packet
>
> IP B.12345 > A.55915: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 3799315799] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 186] [PPID 0x18]
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3799315799] [a_rwnd 86] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP B.12345 > A.55915: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 3799315800] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 187] [PPID 0x18]
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3799315800] [a_rwnd 43] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> --> Socket buffer is almost depleted, but there is space for one more packet,
> send them over association 2, size 43B
>
> IP B.12346 > A.55915: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 3676403240] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 0] [PPID 0x18]
> IP A.55915 > B.12346: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3676403240] [a_rwnd 0] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> --> Immediate drop
>
> IP A.60995 > B.12346: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 387491510] [a_rwnd 0] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> --> Read everything from the socket, both association recover up to maximum rwnd
> they are capable of reaching, note that association 1 recovered up to 3698,
> and association 2 recovered only to 43
>
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3799315800] [a_rwnd 1548] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3799315800] [a_rwnd 3053] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP B.12345 > A.55915: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 3799315801] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 188] [PPID 0x18]
> IP A.55915 > B.12345: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3799315801] [a_rwnd 3698] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
> IP B.12346 > A.55915: sctp (1) [DATA] (B)(E) [TSN: 3676403241] [SID: 0] [SSEQ 1] [PPID 0x18]
> IP A.55915 > B.12346: sctp (1) [SACK] [cum ack 3676403241] [a_rwnd 43] [#gap acks 0] [#dup tsns 0]
>
> A careful reader might wonder why it is necessary to reproduce 1) prior
> reproduction of 2). It is simply easier to observe when to send packet over
> association 2 which will push association into the pressure state.
>
> Proposed solution:
>
> Both problems share the same root cause, and that is improper scaling of socket
> buffer with rwnd. Solution in which sizeof(sk_buff) is taken into concern while
> calculating rwnd is not possible due to fact that there is no linear
> relationship between amount of data blamed in increase/decrease with IP packet
> in which payload arrived. Even in case such solution would be followed,
> complexity of the code would increase. Due to nature of current rwnd handling,
> slow increase (in sctp_assoc_rwnd_increase) of rwnd after pressure state is
> entered is rationale, but it gives false representation to the sender of current
> buffer space. Furthermore, it implements additional congestion control mechanism
> which is defined on implementation, and not on standard basis.
>
> Proposed solution simplifies whole algorithm having on mind definition from rfc:
>
> o Receiver Window (rwnd): This gives the sender an indication of the space
> available in the receiver's inbound buffer.
>
> Core of the proposed solution is given with these lines:
>
> sctp_assoc_rwnd_account:
> if ((asoc->base.sk->sk_rcvbuf - rx_count) > 0)
> asoc->rwnd = (asoc->base.sk->sk_rcvbuf - rx_count) >> 1;
> else
> asoc->rwnd = 0;
>
> We advertise to sender (half of) actual space we have. Half is in the braces
> depending whether you would like to observe size of socket buffer as SO_RECVBUF
> or twice the amount, i.e. size is the one visible from userspace, that is,
> from kernelspace.
> In this way sender is given with good approximation of our buffer space,
> regardless of the buffer policy - we always advertise what we have. Proposed
> solution fixes described problems and removes necessity for rwnd restoration
> algorithm. Finally, as proposed solution is simplification, some lines of code,
> along with some bytes in struct sctp_association are saved.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matija Glavinic Pecotic <matija.glavinic-pecotic.ext@xxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@xxxxxxx>
>
General comment - While this seems to make sense to me generally speaking,
doesn't it currently violate section 6 of the RFC?
A SCTP receiver MUST be able to receive a minimum of 1500 bytes in
one SCTP packet. This means that a SCTP endpoint MUST NOT indicate
less than 1500 bytes in its Initial a_rwnd sent in the INIT or INIT
ACK.
Since we set the initial rwnd value to the larger of sk->sk_rcvbuf/2 or
SCTP_MIN_RWND (1500 bytes), won't we potentially advertize half that amount? It
seems we need to double the minimum socket receive buffer here.
Neil
> ---
>
> --- net-next.orig/net/sctp/associola.c
> +++ net-next/net/sctp/associola.c
> @@ -1367,44 +1367,35 @@ static inline bool sctp_peer_needs_updat
> return false;
> }
>
> -/* Increase asoc's rwnd by len and send any window update SACK if needed. */
> -void sctp_assoc_rwnd_increase(struct sctp_association *asoc, unsigned int len)
> +/* Account asoc's rwnd for the approximated state in the buffer,
> + * and check whether SACK needs to be sent.
> + */
> +void sctp_assoc_rwnd_account(struct sctp_association *asoc, int check_sack)
> {
> + int rx_count;
> struct sctp_chunk *sack;
> struct timer_list *timer;
>
> - if (asoc->rwnd_over) {
> - if (asoc->rwnd_over >= len) {
> - asoc->rwnd_over -= len;
> - } else {
> - asoc->rwnd += (len - asoc->rwnd_over);
> - asoc->rwnd_over = 0;
> - }
> - } else {
> - asoc->rwnd += len;
> - }
> + if (asoc->ep->rcvbuf_policy)
> + rx_count = atomic_read(&asoc->rmem_alloc);
> + else
> + rx_count = atomic_read(&asoc->base.sk->sk_rmem_alloc);
>
> - /* If we had window pressure, start recovering it
> - * once our rwnd had reached the accumulated pressure
> - * threshold. The idea is to recover slowly, but up
> - * to the initial advertised window.
> - */
> - if (asoc->rwnd_press && asoc->rwnd >= asoc->rwnd_press) {
> - int change = min(asoc->pathmtu, asoc->rwnd_press);
> - asoc->rwnd += change;
> - asoc->rwnd_press -= change;
> - }
> + if ((asoc->base.sk->sk_rcvbuf - rx_count) > 0)
> + asoc->rwnd = (asoc->base.sk->sk_rcvbuf - rx_count) >> 1;
> + else
> + asoc->rwnd = 0;
>
> - pr_debug("%s: asoc:%p rwnd increased by %d to (%u, %u) - %u\n",
> - __func__, asoc, len, asoc->rwnd, asoc->rwnd_over,
> - asoc->a_rwnd);
> + pr_debug("%s: asoc:%p rwnd=%u, rx_count=%d, sk_rcvbuf=%d\n",
> + __func__, asoc, asoc->rwnd, rx_count,
> + asoc->base.sk->sk_rcvbuf);
>
> /* Send a window update SACK if the rwnd has increased by at least the
> * minimum of the association's PMTU and half of the receive buffer.
> * The algorithm used is similar to the one described in
> * Section 4.2.3.3 of RFC 1122.
> */
> - if (sctp_peer_needs_update(asoc)) {
> + if (check_sack && sctp_peer_needs_update(asoc)) {
> asoc->a_rwnd = asoc->rwnd;
>
> pr_debug("%s: sending window update SACK- asoc:%p rwnd:%u "
> @@ -1426,45 +1417,6 @@ void sctp_assoc_rwnd_increase(struct sct
> }
> }
>
> -/* Decrease asoc's rwnd by len. */
> -void sctp_assoc_rwnd_decrease(struct sctp_association *asoc, unsigned int len)
> -{
> - int rx_count;
> - int over = 0;
> -
> - if (unlikely(!asoc->rwnd || asoc->rwnd_over))
> - pr_debug("%s: association:%p has asoc->rwnd:%u, "
> - "asoc->rwnd_over:%u!\n", __func__, asoc,
> - asoc->rwnd, asoc->rwnd_over);
> -
> - if (asoc->ep->rcvbuf_policy)
> - rx_count = atomic_read(&asoc->rmem_alloc);
> - else
> - rx_count = atomic_read(&asoc->base.sk->sk_rmem_alloc);
> -
> - /* If we've reached or overflowed our receive buffer, announce
> - * a 0 rwnd if rwnd would still be positive. Store the
> - * the potential pressure overflow so that the window can be restored
> - * back to original value.
> - */
> - if (rx_count >= asoc->base.sk->sk_rcvbuf)
> - over = 1;
> -
> - if (asoc->rwnd >= len) {
> - asoc->rwnd -= len;
> - if (over) {
> - asoc->rwnd_press += asoc->rwnd;
> - asoc->rwnd = 0;
> - }
> - } else {
> - asoc->rwnd_over = len - asoc->rwnd;
> - asoc->rwnd = 0;
> - }
> -
> - pr_debug("%s: asoc:%p rwnd decreased by %d to (%u, %u, %u)\n",
> - __func__, asoc, len, asoc->rwnd, asoc->rwnd_over,
> - asoc->rwnd_press);
> -}
>
> /* Build the bind address list for the association based on info from the
> * local endpoint and the remote peer.
> --- net-next.orig/include/net/sctp/structs.h
> +++ net-next/include/net/sctp/structs.h
> @@ -1653,17 +1653,6 @@ struct sctp_association {
> /* This is the last advertised value of rwnd over a SACK chunk. */
> __u32 a_rwnd;
>
> - /* Number of bytes by which the rwnd has slopped. The rwnd is allowed
> - * to slop over a maximum of the association's frag_point.
> - */
> - __u32 rwnd_over;
> -
> - /* Keeps treack of rwnd pressure. This happens when we have
> - * a window, but not recevie buffer (i.e small packets). This one
> - * is releases slowly (1 PMTU at a time ).
> - */
> - __u32 rwnd_press;
> -
> /* This is the sndbuf size in use for the association.
> * This corresponds to the sndbuf size for the association,
> * as specified in the sk->sndbuf.
> @@ -1892,8 +1881,7 @@ void sctp_assoc_update(struct sctp_assoc
> __u32 sctp_association_get_next_tsn(struct sctp_association *);
>
> void sctp_assoc_sync_pmtu(struct sock *, struct sctp_association *);
> -void sctp_assoc_rwnd_increase(struct sctp_association *, unsigned int);
> -void sctp_assoc_rwnd_decrease(struct sctp_association *, unsigned int);
> +void sctp_assoc_rwnd_account(struct sctp_association *, int);
> void sctp_assoc_set_primary(struct sctp_association *,
> struct sctp_transport *);
> void sctp_assoc_del_nonprimary_peers(struct sctp_association *,
> --- net-next.orig/net/sctp/sm_statefuns.c
> +++ net-next/net/sctp/sm_statefuns.c
> @@ -6176,7 +6176,7 @@ static int sctp_eat_data(const struct sc
> * PMTU. In cases, such as loopback, this might be a rather
> * large spill over.
> */
> - if ((!chunk->data_accepted) && (!asoc->rwnd || asoc->rwnd_over ||
> + if ((!chunk->data_accepted) && (!asoc->rwnd ||
> (datalen > asoc->rwnd + asoc->frag_point))) {
>
> /* If this is the next TSN, consider reneging to make
> --- net-next.orig/net/sctp/socket.c
> +++ net-next/net/sctp/socket.c
> @@ -2097,7 +2097,7 @@ static int sctp_recvmsg(struct kiocb *io
> * rwnd is updated when the event is freed.
> */
> if (!sctp_ulpevent_is_notification(event))
> - sctp_assoc_rwnd_increase(event->asoc, copied);
> + sctp_assoc_rwnd_account(event->asoc, 1);
> goto out;
> } else if ((event->msg_flags & MSG_NOTIFICATION) ||
> (event->msg_flags & MSG_EOR))
> --- net-next.orig/net/sctp/ulpevent.c
> +++ net-next/net/sctp/ulpevent.c
> @@ -989,7 +989,7 @@ static void sctp_ulpevent_receive_data(s
> skb = sctp_event2skb(event);
> /* Set the owner and charge rwnd for bytes received. */
> sctp_ulpevent_set_owner(event, asoc);
> - sctp_assoc_rwnd_decrease(asoc, skb_headlen(skb));
> + sctp_assoc_rwnd_account(asoc, 0);
>
> if (!skb->data_len)
> return;
> @@ -1035,7 +1035,7 @@ static void sctp_ulpevent_release_data(s
> }
>
> done:
> - sctp_assoc_rwnd_increase(event->asoc, len);
> + sctp_assoc_rwnd_account(event->asoc, 1);
> sctp_ulpevent_release_owner(event);
> }
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
