From: Gerrit Renker Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 04:21:46 +0000 (-0700) Subject: [TCP]: Update references in two old comments X-Git-Tag: v2.6.22-rc1~1107^2~14 X-Git-Url: http://review.tizen.org/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=65bb723c9502b7ba0a3aad13bdac8832e213ba74;p=platform%2Fkernel%2Flinux-3.10.git [TCP]: Update references in two old comments This updates references to drafts in comments which must be about 10 years old. Internet draft draft-ietf-tcpimpl-prob-03.txt expired in 1998 and was replaced by RFC 2525 in March 1999. Section 3.10 of the draft maps almost identically into section 2.17 of RFC 2525: both are entitled "Failure to RST on close with data pending", the differences in text body amount to a typo and minor sentence change. Signed-off-by: Gerrit Renker Signed-off-by: David S. Miller --- diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp.c b/net/ipv4/tcp.c index 2cf9a89..d6e4886 100644 --- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c @@ -1573,14 +1573,12 @@ void tcp_close(struct sock *sk, long timeout) sk_stream_mem_reclaim(sk); - /* As outlined in draft-ietf-tcpimpl-prob-03.txt, section - * 3.10, we send a RST here because data was lost. To - * witness the awful effects of the old behavior of always - * doing a FIN, run an older 2.1.x kernel or 2.0.x, start - * a bulk GET in an FTP client, suspend the process, wait - * for the client to advertise a zero window, then kill -9 - * the FTP client, wheee... Note: timeout is always zero - * in such a case. + /* As outlined in RFC 2525, section 2.17, we send a RST here because + * data was lost. To witness the awful effects of the old behavior of + * always doing a FIN, run an older 2.1.x kernel or 2.0.x, start a bulk + * GET in an FTP client, suspend the process, wait for the client to + * advertise a zero window, then kill -9 the FTP client, wheee... + * Note: timeout is always zero in such a case. */ if (data_was_unread) { /* Unread data was tossed, zap the connection. */ diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c index e70a684..b5fa3c1 100644 --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c @@ -2035,7 +2035,7 @@ void tcp_send_fin(struct sock *sk) /* We get here when a process closes a file descriptor (either due to * an explicit close() or as a byproduct of exit()'ing) and there * was unread data in the receive queue. This behavior is recommended - * by draft-ietf-tcpimpl-prob-03.txt section 3.10. -DaveM + * by RFC 2525, section 2.17. -DaveM */ void tcp_send_active_reset(struct sock *sk, gfp_t priority) {