-
sctp
SCTP Discussions
Text archives Help
- From: Andreas Jungmaier <ajung AT exp-math.uni-essen.de>
- To: "Michael Nikolaev" <mvn AT gu.kiev.ua>
- To: discussion AT sctp.de
- Subject: Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Bug in SACK processing
- Date: Fri Aug 30 12:47:00 2002
- List-id: SCTP Discussions <discussion.sctp.de>
Michael,
thanks for the input. I will check that.
The idea of having the same chunk pointers in two different
lists _IS_ good (provided the C-modules that administrate
these two lists have a clear interface for modifications
of the chunk data, i.e. the mentioned free() operation).
Can you give us a reproducible scenario that triggers
the bug you mention ?
Best regards,
Andreas
On 30 Aug 2002 02:58 CEST you wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I guess, there is the following bug in the function rtx_process_sack()
> [reltransfer.c].
> At the beginning of this function the function rtx_process_sack() is called
> that will
> FREE() chunk data. Afterwards, at the end of rtx_process_sack() one of
> functions
> fc_sack_info() or fc_fast_retransmission() will be called that will call
> eventually
> fc_dequeue_sacked_chunks(). The latter function is scanning fields of chunk
> data that have been previously deleted (from heap) in rtx_dequeue_up_to().
> I think, it is was not very good idea to have the same chunk pointers in two
> different lists.
> Best regards,
> Michael
- [SCTP-Discussion] Bug in SACK processing, Michael Nikolaev, 08/30/2002
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Bug in SACK processing, Andreas Jungmaier, 08/30/2002
- Re: [SCTP-Discussion] Bug in SACK processing, Michael Nikolaev, 08/30/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19+.
