From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Erik Hugne Subject: Re: [PATCH] tipc: flow control should not account for sk_rcvbuf Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2012 14:12:20 +0200 Message-ID: <506D7D24.3070601@ericsson.com> References: <1349342067-27586-1-git-send-email-erik.hugne@ericsson.com> <1349342493.16011.32.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <506D5DEF.9050700@ericsson.com> <1349346360.16011.36.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Jon Maloy , "ying.xue@windriver.com" , "paul.gortmaker@windriver.com" To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mailgw7.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.48]:54507 "EHLO mailgw7.ericsson.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756004Ab2JDM10 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Oct 2012 08:27:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1349346360.16011.36.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > And this limit is tested _before_ queueing to backlog if socket is owned > by the user ? > > You'll have to demonstrate this in the changelog. > > Again, I dont think this patch is safe, we need an explicit limit. You're right Eric.. Another way of solving it is to increase the default sk_rcvbuf size to (TIPC_FLOW_CONTROL_WIN * 2 * TIPC_MAX_USER_MSG_SIZE) at socket creation. Do you think that would be acceptable?