mirror of
https://github.com/AuxXxilium/linux_dsm_epyc7002.git
synced 2024-11-25 05:30:54 +07:00
sctp: only update outstanding_bytes for transmitted queue when doing prsctp_prune
Now outstanding_bytes is only increased when appending chunks into one
packet and sending it at 1st time, while decreased when it is about to
move into retransmit queue. It means outstanding_bytes value is already
decreased for all chunks in retransmit queue.
However sctp_prsctp_prune_sent is a common function to check the chunks
in both transmitted and retransmit queue, it decrease outstanding_bytes
when moving a chunk into abandoned queue from either of them.
It could cause outstanding_bytes underflow, as it also decreases it's
value for the chunks in retransmit queue.
This patch fixes it by only updating outstanding_bytes for transmitted
queue when pruning queues for prsctp prio policy, the same fix is also
needed in sctp_check_transmitted.
Fixes: 8dbdf1f5b0
("sctp: implement prsctp PRIO policy")
Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
This commit is contained in:
parent
6fef90c6b3
commit
d30fc5126e
@ -377,7 +377,8 @@ static int sctp_prsctp_prune_sent(struct sctp_association *asoc,
|
||||
asoc->abandoned_sent[SCTP_PR_INDEX(PRIO)]++;
|
||||
streamout->ext->abandoned_sent[SCTP_PR_INDEX(PRIO)]++;
|
||||
|
||||
if (!chk->tsn_gap_acked) {
|
||||
if (queue != &asoc->outqueue.retransmit &&
|
||||
!chk->tsn_gap_acked) {
|
||||
if (chk->transport)
|
||||
chk->transport->flight_size -=
|
||||
sctp_data_size(chk);
|
||||
@ -1434,7 +1435,8 @@ static void sctp_check_transmitted(struct sctp_outq *q,
|
||||
/* If this chunk has not been acked, stop
|
||||
* considering it as 'outstanding'.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
if (!tchunk->tsn_gap_acked) {
|
||||
if (transmitted_queue != &q->retransmit &&
|
||||
!tchunk->tsn_gap_acked) {
|
||||
if (tchunk->transport)
|
||||
tchunk->transport->flight_size -=
|
||||
sctp_data_size(tchunk);
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user