|
Hello,
On Mon, 22 Apr 2013, Simon Horman wrote:
> > 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.
>
> IMHO there seem to be many problems with SCTP, but it is good to
> fix the ones we find as we find them.
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.
> Would you like to make a patch for the above change or should I?
May be the code is correct, my mistake. I was
confused from the order in sctp_events[] but ipvs_sctp_event_t
allocates values for _SER states.
> > Also, I'm not sure we support properly the
> > one-way states as done for TCP (IP_VS_DIR_INPUT_ONLY).
> > May be this code deserves more serious review, for example,
> > net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_proto_sctp.c looks as good
> > source for comparison.
>
> I believe it does need a more serious review.
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|
