3.19.8-ckt13 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
---8<------------------------------------------------------------
From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@xxxxxxxxx>
commit 38ee8fb67c3457f36f5137073c4b8ac2436d2393 upstream.
They don't need to be any bigger than that and with this we start a new
bitfield for tracking association runtime stuff, like zero window
situation.
Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@xxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[ kamal: 3.19-stable prereq for
8a0d19c sctp: start t5 timer only when peer rwnd is 0 and local state is SHUTDOWN_PENDING ]
Signed-off-by: Kamal Mostafa <kamal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/net/sctp/structs.h | 16 ++++++++--------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/net/sctp/structs.h b/include/net/sctp/structs.h
index 495c87e..7bbb710 100644
--- a/include/net/sctp/structs.h
+++ b/include/net/sctp/structs.h
@@ -775,10 +775,10 @@ struct sctp_transport {
hb_sent:1,
/* Is the Path MTU update pending on this tranport */
- pmtu_pending:1;
+ pmtu_pending:1,
- /* Has this transport moved the ctsn since we last sacked */
- __u32 sack_generation;
+ /* Has this transport moved the ctsn since we last sacked */
+ sack_generation:1;
u32 dst_cookie;
struct flowi fl;
@@ -1482,19 +1482,19 @@ struct sctp_association {
prsctp_capable:1, /* Can peer do PR-SCTP? */
auth_capable:1; /* Is peer doing SCTP-AUTH? */
- /* Ack State : This flag indicates if the next received
+ /* sack_needed : This flag indicates if the next received
* : packet is to be responded to with a
- * : SACK. This is initializedto 0. When a packet
- * : is received it is incremented. If this value
+ * : SACK. This is initialized to 0. When a packet
+ * : is received sack_cnt is incremented. If this value
* : reaches 2 or more, a SACK is sent and the
* : value is reset to 0. Note: This is used only
* : when no DATA chunks are received out of
* : order. When DATA chunks are out of order,
* : SACK's are not delayed (see Section 6).
*/
- __u8 sack_needed; /* Do we need to sack the peer? */
+ __u8 sack_needed:1, /* Do we need to sack the peer? */
+ sack_generation:1;
__u32 sack_cnt;
- __u32 sack_generation;
__u32 adaptation_ind; /* Adaptation Code point. */
--
1.9.1
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html