Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2) 
Date:      Sat, 5 Jun 2010 21:27:43 +0000 (UTC)
From:      Randall Stewart <rrs@FreeBSD.org>
To:        src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   svn commit: r208855 - head/sys/netinet
Message-ID:  <201006052127.o55LRh7w042813@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help 
Author: rrs
Date: Sat Jun  5 21:27:43 2010
New Revision: 208855
URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/208855

Log:
  This change does the following:
  1) Fix the alignment of a comment.
  2) Fix a BUG where we were NOT paying attention
     to the RESEND marking on retransmitting control
     chunks.. and worse we were not decrementing the
     retran count that could cause us to loop forever.
  3) Add in the valdiate_no_lock function on invariants
     so that we will really check all ways out to be sure
     a lock does not slip out locked.
  
  MFC after:	1 week.

Modified:
  head/sys/netinet/sctp_output.c

Modified: head/sys/netinet/sctp_output.c
==============================================================================
--- head/sys/netinet/sctp_output.c	Sat Jun  5 21:22:58 2010	(r208854)
+++ head/sys/netinet/sctp_output.c	Sat Jun  5 21:27:43 2010	(r208855)
@@ -3053,32 +3053,32 @@ sctp_source_address_selection(struct sct
 	 * it out
 	 * zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 	 * For V4
-         *------------------------------------------
+	 * ------------------------------------------
 	 *      source     *      dest  *  result
 	 * -----------------------------------------
 	 * <a>  Private    *    Global  *  NAT
 	 * -----------------------------------------
 	 * <b>  Private    *    Private *  No problem
 	 * -----------------------------------------
-         * <c>  Global     *    Private *  Huh, How will this work?
+	 * <c>  Global     *    Private *  Huh, How will this work?
 	 * -----------------------------------------
-         * <d>  Global     *    Global  *  No Problem
-         *------------------------------------------
+	 * <d>  Global     *    Global  *  No Problem
+	 *------------------------------------------
 	 * zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
 	 * For V6
-         *------------------------------------------
+	 *------------------------------------------
 	 *      source     *      dest  *  result
 	 * -----------------------------------------
 	 * <a>  Linklocal  *    Global  *
 	 * -----------------------------------------
 	 * <b>  Linklocal  * Linklocal  *  No problem
 	 * -----------------------------------------
-         * <c>  Global     * Linklocal  *  Huh, How will this work?
+	 * <c>  Global     * Linklocal  *  Huh, How will this work?
 	 * -----------------------------------------
-         * <d>  Global     *    Global  *  No Problem
-         *------------------------------------------
+	 * <d>  Global     *    Global  *  No Problem
+	 *------------------------------------------
 	 * zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
-         *
+	 *
 	 * And then we add to that what happens if there are multiple addresses
 	 * assigned to an interface. Remember the ifa on a ifn is a linked
 	 * list of addresses. So one interface can have more than one IP
@@ -3091,13 +3091,13 @@ sctp_source_address_selection(struct sct
 	 * Decisions:
 	 *
 	 * - count the number of addresses on the interface.
-         * - if it is one, no problem except case <c>.
-         *   For <a> we will assume a NAT out there.
+	 * - if it is one, no problem except case <c>.
+	 *   For <a> we will assume a NAT out there.
 	 * - if there are more than one, then we need to worry about scope P
 	 *   or G. We should prefer G -> G and P -> P if possible.
 	 *   Then as a secondary fall back to mixed types G->P being a last
 	 *   ditch one.
-         * - The above all works for bound all, but bound specific we need to
+	 * - The above all works for bound all, but bound specific we need to
 	 *   use the same concept but instead only consider the bound
 	 *   addresses. If the bound set is NOT assigned to the interface then
 	 *   we must use rotation amongst the bound addresses..
@@ -8913,6 +8913,9 @@ sctp_chunk_retransmission(struct sctp_in
 		if ((chk->rec.chunk_id.id == SCTP_COOKIE_ECHO) ||
 		    (chk->rec.chunk_id.id == SCTP_STREAM_RESET) ||
 		    (chk->rec.chunk_id.id == SCTP_FORWARD_CUM_TSN)) {
+			if (chk->sent != SCTP_DATAGRAM_RESEND) {
+				continue;
+			}
 			if (chk->rec.chunk_id.id == SCTP_STREAM_RESET) {
 				if (chk != asoc->str_reset) {
 					/*
@@ -8973,7 +8976,7 @@ sctp_chunk_retransmission(struct sctp_in
 		/* (void)SCTP_GETTIME_TIMEVAL(&chk->whoTo->last_sent_time); */
 		*cnt_out += 1;
 		chk->sent = SCTP_DATAGRAM_SENT;
-		/* sctp_ucount_decr(asoc->sent_queue_retran_cnt); */
+		sctp_ucount_decr(stcb->asoc.sent_queue_retran_cnt);
 		if (fwd_tsn == 0) {
 			return (0);
 		} else {
@@ -13427,6 +13430,13 @@ out_unlocked:
 		}
 	}
 #endif
+#ifdef INVARIANTS
+	if (inp) {
+		sctp_validate_no_locks(inp);
+	} else {
+		printf("Warning - inp is NULL so cant validate locks\n");
+	}
+#endif
 	if (top) {
 		sctp_m_freem(top);
 	}

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201006052127.o55LRh7w042813>