From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neil Horman Subject: Re: [PATCH] sctp: don't break the loop while meeting the active_path so as to find the matched transport Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 09:27:20 -0500 Message-ID: <20130308142720.GA9873@hmsreliant.think-freely.org> References: <1362728377-11025-1-git-send-email-xufeng.zhang@windriver.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: vyasevich@gmail.com, davem@davemloft.net, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Xufeng Zhang Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1362728377-11025-1-git-send-email-xufeng.zhang@windriver.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 03:39:37PM +0800, Xufeng Zhang wrote: > sctp_assoc_lookup_tsn() function searchs which transport a certain TSN > was sent on, if not found in the active_path transport, then go search > all the other transports in the peer's transport_addr_list, however, we > should continue to the next entry rather than break the loop when meet > the active_path transport. > > Signed-off-by: Xufeng Zhang > --- > net/sctp/associola.c | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/sctp/associola.c b/net/sctp/associola.c > index 43cd0dd..d2709e2 100644 > --- a/net/sctp/associola.c > +++ b/net/sctp/associola.c > @@ -1079,7 +1079,7 @@ struct sctp_transport *sctp_assoc_lookup_tsn(struct sctp_association *asoc, > transports) { > > if (transport == active) > - break; > + continue; > list_for_each_entry(chunk, &transport->transmitted, > transmitted_list) { > if (key == chunk->subh.data_hdr->tsn) { > -- > 1.7.0.2 > > This works, but what might be better would be if we did a move to front heuristic in sctp_assoc_set_primary. E.g. when we set the active_path, move the requisite transport to the front of the transport_addr_list. If we did that, then we could just do one for loop in sctp_assoc_lookup_tsn and wind up implicitly check the active path first without having to check it seprately and skip it in the second for loop. Neil