tcp: should use number of sack blocks instead of -1
While looking for the recent "sack issue" I also read all eff_sacks usage that was played around by some relevant commit. I found out that there's another thing that is asking for a fix (unrelated to the "sack issue" though). This feature has probably very little significance in practice. Opposite direction timeout with bidirectional tcp comes to me as the most likely scenario though there might be other cases as well related to non-data segments we send (e.g., response to the opposite direction segment). Also some ACK losses or option space wasted for other purposes is necessary to prevent the earlier SACK feedback getting to the sender. Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment