On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 11:22 AM Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
<marcelo.leitner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Sorry for the long delay on this review.
>
> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 02:14:44PM +0800, Xin Long wrote:
> > SCTP Quick failover draft section 5.1, point 5 has been removed
> > from rfc7829. Instead, "the sender SHOULD (i) notify the Upper
> > Layer Protocol (ULP) about this state transition", as said in
> > section 3.2, point 8.
> >
> > So this patch is to add SCTP_ADDR_POTENTIALLY_FAILED, defined
> > in section 7.1, "which is reported if the affected address
> > becomes PF". Also remove transport cwnd's update when moving
> > from PF back to ACTIVE , which is no longer in rfc7829 either.
> >
> > v1->v2:
> > - no change
> > v2->v3:
> > - define SCTP_ADDR_PF SCTP_ADDR_POTENTIALLY_FAILED
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > include/uapi/linux/sctp.h | 2 ++
> > net/sctp/associola.c | 17 ++++-------------
> > 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/sctp.h b/include/uapi/linux/sctp.h
> > index 6bce7f9..f4ab7bb 100644
> > --- a/include/uapi/linux/sctp.h
> > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/sctp.h
> > @@ -410,6 +410,8 @@ enum sctp_spc_state {
> > SCTP_ADDR_ADDED,
> > SCTP_ADDR_MADE_PRIM,
> > SCTP_ADDR_CONFIRMED,
> > + SCTP_ADDR_POTENTIALLY_FAILED,
> > +#define SCTP_ADDR_PF SCTP_ADDR_POTENTIALLY_FAILED
> > };
> >
> >
> > diff --git a/net/sctp/associola.c b/net/sctp/associola.c
> > index 1ba893b..4f9efba 100644
> > --- a/net/sctp/associola.c
> > +++ b/net/sctp/associola.c
> > @@ -801,14 +801,6 @@ void sctp_assoc_control_transport(struct sctp_association *asoc,
>
> While at here, dealing with spc_state, please seize the moment and
> initialize it to the enum instead:
>
> @@ -787,7 +787,7 @@ void sctp_assoc_control_transport(struct sctp_association *asoc,
> sctp_sn_error_t error)
> {
> bool ulp_notify = true;
> - int spc_state = 0;
> + int spc_state = SCTP_ADDR_AVAILABLE;
>
>
> > spc_state = SCTP_ADDR_CONFIRMED;
> > else
> > spc_state = SCTP_ADDR_AVAILABLE;
>
> This else could be removed (equals to initial value).
yes, will improve it.
>
> > - /* Don't inform ULP about transition from PF to
> > - * active state and set cwnd to 1 MTU, see SCTP
> > - * Quick failover draft section 5.1, point 5
> > - */
> > - if (transport->state == SCTP_PF) {
> > - ulp_notify = false;
> > - transport->cwnd = asoc->pathmtu;
> > - }
> > transport->state = SCTP_ACTIVE;
> > break;
> >
> > @@ -817,19 +809,18 @@ void sctp_assoc_control_transport(struct sctp_association *asoc,
> > * to inactive state. Also, release the cached route since
> > * there may be a better route next time.
> > */
> > - if (transport->state != SCTP_UNCONFIRMED)
> > + if (transport->state != SCTP_UNCONFIRMED) {
> > transport->state = SCTP_INACTIVE;
> > - else {
> > + spc_state = SCTP_ADDR_UNREACHABLE;
> > + } else {
> > sctp_transport_dst_release(transport);
> > ulp_notify = false;
> > }
> > -
> > - spc_state = SCTP_ADDR_UNREACHABLE;
> > break;
> >
> > case SCTP_TRANSPORT_PF:
> > transport->state = SCTP_PF;
> > - ulp_notify = false;
> > + spc_state = SCTP_ADDR_POTENTIALLY_FAILED;
> > break;
> >
> > default:
> > --
> > 2.1.0
> >
