You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We have recommended to use BPF to set socket option per subflow (see #76), on TCP socket then.
But it looks like we didn't check if we can correctly do some setsockopt() on MPTCP sockets, especially the ones iterating over the different subflows. It would be good to add a test in the BPF selftests to unsure this case is covered, and verify with LOCKDEP that everything is OK there.
The reason behind that: doing a setsockopt on an MPTCP socket from BPF might be a problem if this is done in an atomic context (MPTCP will then lock the subflows, etc.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We have recommended to use BPF to set socket option per subflow (see #76), on TCP socket then.
But it looks like we didn't check if we can correctly do some
setsockopt()
on MPTCP sockets, especially the ones iterating over the different subflows. It would be good to add a test in the BPF selftests to unsure this case is covered, and verify withLOCKDEP
that everything is OK there.The reason behind that: doing a setsockopt on an MPTCP socket from BPF might be a problem if this is done in an atomic context (MPTCP will then lock the subflows, etc.)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: