Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[patch\]\s+ipvs\:\s+off\s+by\s+one\s+in\s+set_sctp

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[patch\]\s+ipvs\:\s+off\s+by\s+one\s+in\s+set_sctp_state\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [patch] ipvs: off by one in set_sctp_state() (score: 1): Author: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 11:22:43 +0900; Thanks, it sounds like we should study things more carefully before making any changes. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@x; /html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00046.html (12,092 bytes)
2. Re: [patch] ipvs: off by one in set_sctp_state() (score: 1): Author: Moahn Reddy <mohanreddykv@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:19:24 +0530; Hi Dan, I am not saying that that is not a problem. Yes, we need to fix that array issue. I just said that I thought 0 to 254 enough at that time. Thanks, Mohan I see there is no problem in the code; /html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00045.html (11,075 bytes)
3. Re: [patch] ipvs: off by one in set_sctp_state() (score: 1): Author: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 12:30:16 +0300; The issue is can chunk_type in set_sctp_state() be 255? How is this prevented in the code? regards, dan carpenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in the body o; /html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00044.html (10,934 bytes)
4. Re: [patch] ipvs: off by one in set_sctp_state() (score: 1): Author: Moahn Reddy <mohanreddykv@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 14:47:10 +0530; Hi, I see there is no problem in the code regarding the state change. And the thing why I took 255 in the sctp_events array is that as per the sctp specification, the 255 message is reserved, so I th; /html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00043.html (13,302 bytes)
5. Re: [patch] ipvs: off by one in set_sctp_state() (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:03:28 +0300 (EEST); Hello, At the time I found it (during IPVS optimizations development), it didn't looked fatal, I preferred to allocate more time for SCTP for debugging. May be the code is correct, my mistake. I was; /html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00042.html (10,828 bytes)
6. Re: [patch] ipvs: off by one in set_sctp_state() (score: 1): Author: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 13:11:52 +0900; IMHO there seem to be many problems with SCTP, but it is good to fix the ones we find as we find them. Would you like to make a patch for the above change or should I? I believe it does need a more s; /html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00039.html (11,773 bytes)
7. Re: [patch] ipvs: off by one in set_sctp_state() (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 15:25:21 +0300 (EEST); Hello, There are more confusing (still, non-fatal) problems in this IPVS-SCTP support, eg. if (direction == IP_VS_DIR_OUTPUT) - event++; + event *= 2; I guess we are running with wrong timeouts. Also; /html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00036.html (10,832 bytes)
8. [patch] ipvs: off by one in set_sctp_state() (score: 1): Author: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2013 14:24:55 +0300; The sctp_events[] come from sch->type in set_sctp_state(). They are between 0-255 so that means we need 256 elements in the array. I believe that because of how the code is aligned there is normally; /html/lvs-devel/2013-04/msg00035.html (9,739 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]