From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: assign the sock correctly to an outgoing SYNACK packet Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 15:25:53 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20130408.152553.2156347442514600818.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20130408154519.18177.57709.stgit@localhost> <20130408.121434.1965501143066047212.davem@davemloft.net> <3541094.5siDbVn1lC@sifl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: eric.dumazet@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, mvadkert@redhat.com To: pmoore@redhat.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:51970 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761523Ab3DHTZz (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 15:25:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <3541094.5siDbVn1lC@sifl> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Paul Moore Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 13:22:50 -0400 > Contrary to popular belief, my goal is to not destroy the scalability and/or > performance of our network stack, I just want to make sure we have a quality > network stack that is not only fast and scalable, but also preserves the > security functionality that makes Linux attractive to a number of users. Get the violin out. > To that end, we could put a #ifdef in the middle of > tcp_make_synack(), but that seems very ugly to me and I think sets a > bad precedence for the network stack and kernel as a whole. Not an ifdef, a run time state test.