From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2017 21:10:55 -0700
> From: Eric Dumazet
>
> I wrongly assumed tp->tcp_mstamp was up to date at the time
> tcp_rack_reo_timeout() was called.
>
> It is not true, since we only update tcp->tcp_mstamp when receiving
> a packet (as initially done in commit 69e
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:10 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
>
> I wrongly assumed tp->tcp_mstamp was up to date at the time
> tcp_rack_reo_timeout() was called.
>
> It is not true, since we only update tcp->tcp_mstamp when receiving
> a packet (as initially done in commit 69e996c58
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:10 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
>
> I wrongly assumed tp->tcp_mstamp was up to date at the time
> tcp_rack_reo_timeout() was called.
>
> It is not true, since we only update tcp->tcp_mstamp when receiving
> a packet (as initially done in commit 69e996c58
From: Eric Dumazet
I wrongly assumed tp->tcp_mstamp was up to date at the time
tcp_rack_reo_timeout() was called.
It is not true, since we only update tcp->tcp_mstamp when receiving
a packet (as initially done in commit 69e996c58a35 ("tcp: add
tp->tcp_mstamp field")
tcp_rack_reo_timeout() being