Page MenuHomeFreeBSD
Differential D9472

Update sysutils/backuppc to 3.3.2
ClosedPublic
Actions

Authored by krion on Feb 7 2017, 11:36 AM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
Unknown Object (File)
Mon, Mar 3, 8:36 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 1 2025, 9:26 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 1 2025, 12:27 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Mar 1 2025, 6:20 AM
Unknown Object (File)
Feb 18 2025, 9:42 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Feb 18 2025, 6:54 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Feb 9 2025, 5:14 PM
Unknown Object (File)
Jan 22 2025, 5:48 PM
View All Files
Subscribers
None

Details

Reviewers
fjoe
mat
Commits
rP433557: - Update sysutils/backuppc to 3.3.2
Summary

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=216875

Diff Detail

Repository
rP FreeBSD ports repository
Lint
Lint Not Applicable
Unit
Tests Not Applicable

Event Timeline

krion updated this revision to Diff 24826.Feb 7 2017, 11:36 AM
krion retitled this revision from to Update sysutils/backuppc to 3.3.2.
krion updated this object.
krion edited the test plan for this revision. (Show Details)
krion added reviewers: fjoe, mat.
mat added inline comments.Feb 7 2017, 12:02 PM
sysutils/backuppc/Makefile
58–82 ↗(On Diff #24826)

This would be the perfect occasion to convert those to options helpers.

krion updated this revision to Diff 24832.Feb 7 2017, 2:29 PM
  • Initialize of options helpers
mat accepted this revision.Feb 7 2017, 2:34 PM
mat edited edge metadata.
mat added inline comments.
sysutils/backuppc/Makefile
68 ↗(On Diff #24832)

You can drop the include too.

This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Feb 7 2017, 2:34 PM
Closed by commit rP433557: - Update sysutils/backuppc to 3.3.2 (authored by krion). · Explain WhyFeb 7 2017, 2:40 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.

Revision Contents
Changeset List

Diff 24835

View Options

head/sysutils/backuppc/Makefile

Show First 20 Lines • Show All 1,629 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines#endif
* fall back to non RFC1323 RTT calculation. Normalize * fall back to non RFC1323 RTT calculation. Normalize
* timestamp if syncookies were used when this connection * timestamp if syncookies were used when this connection
* was established. * was established.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) && (to.to_tsecr != 0)) { if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) && (to.to_tsecr != 0)) {
to.to_tsecr -= tp->ts_offset; to.to_tsecr -= tp->ts_offset;
if (TSTMP_GT(to.to_tsecr, tcp_ts_getticks())) { if (TSTMP_GT(to.to_tsecr, tcp_ts_getticks())) {
to.to_tsecr = 0; to.to_tsecr = 0;
} else if (tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) {
cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);
} }
} }
/* /*
* Process options only when we get SYN/ACK back. The SYN case * Process options only when we get SYN/ACK back. The SYN case
* for incoming connections is handled in tcp_syncache. * for incoming connections is handled in tcp_syncache.
* According to RFC1323 the window field in a SYN (i.e., a <SYN> * According to RFC1323 the window field in a SYN (i.e., a <SYN>
* or <SYN,ACK>) segment itself is never scaled. * or <SYN,ACK>) segment itself is never scaled.
* XXX this is traditional behavior, may need to be cleaned up. * XXX this is traditional behavior, may need to be cleaned up.
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 136 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines if (tlen == 0) {
(to.to_flags & TOF_SACK) == 0 && (to.to_flags & TOF_SACK) == 0 &&
TAILQ_EMPTY(&tp->snd_holes)) { TAILQ_EMPTY(&tp->snd_holes)) {
/* /*
* This is a pure ack for outstanding data. * This is a pure ack for outstanding data.
*/ */
TCPSTAT_INC(tcps_predack); TCPSTAT_INC(tcps_predack);
/* /*
* "bad retransmit" recovery without timestamps. * "bad retransmit" recovery.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 && if (tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID && tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 && tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin)) { (((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
to.to_tsecr != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) ||
((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin))))
cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR); cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);
}
/* /*
* Recalculate the transmit timer / rtt. * Recalculate the transmit timer / rtt.
* *
* Some boxes send broken timestamp replies * Some boxes send broken timestamp replies
rscheffUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Any specific reason to write the or statement as two separate if clauses?

I believe in other parts we do it ((true & x & y & z) | (false & a & b &c )) - as multiline checks;

I don't like them both get executed "always", so at the very least, an "else" just before the 2nd if would be good.

The logic looks ok to me.

rscheff: Any specific reason to write the or statement as two separate if clauses? I believe in other…
glebiusUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

I agree with Richard, better one complex if clause. The two clauses are mutually exclusive as one wants TOF_TS and other !TOF_TS, so cc_cong_signal() can be executed only once. My first reading was that it is intentionally written this way cause we may want two calls into cc_cong_singal(), so it was a misleading reading.

Oh, the upper level embracing if can also be merged into one big clause:

if ((tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
    tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
    tp->t_badrxtwin != 0) &&
    (((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
    (to.to_tsecr != 0) &&
    TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) ||
    ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 &&
    TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin))))
        cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);

This will also fix lines longer than 79 chars. IMHO, we may slightly violate style(9) and add single space indentation to highlight our three main large blocks (a && (b || c)).

glebius: I agree with Richard, better one complex if clause. The two clauses are mutually exclusive as…
tuexenAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Now using one and two spaces of indentation to make the expression more readable.

tuexen: Now using one and two spaces of indentation to make the expression more readable.
tuexenAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

It was a try to break things up for improved readability by humans.

tuexen: It was a try to break things up for improved readability by humans.
* during the SYN+ACK phase, ignore * during the SYN+ACK phase, ignore
* timestamps of 0 or we could calculate a * timestamps of 0 or we could calculate a
* huge RTT and blow up the retransmit timer. * huge RTT and blow up the retransmit timer.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 && if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
to.to_tsecr) { to.to_tsecr) {
uint32_t t; uint32_t t;
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 2,424 Lines • Show Last 20 Lines
View Options

head/sysutils/backuppc/distinfo

Show First 20 Lines • Show All 1,629 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines#endif
* fall back to non RFC1323 RTT calculation. Normalize * fall back to non RFC1323 RTT calculation. Normalize
* timestamp if syncookies were used when this connection * timestamp if syncookies were used when this connection
* was established. * was established.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) && (to.to_tsecr != 0)) { if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) && (to.to_tsecr != 0)) {
to.to_tsecr -= tp->ts_offset; to.to_tsecr -= tp->ts_offset;
if (TSTMP_GT(to.to_tsecr, tcp_ts_getticks())) { if (TSTMP_GT(to.to_tsecr, tcp_ts_getticks())) {
to.to_tsecr = 0; to.to_tsecr = 0;
} else if (tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) {
cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);
} }
} }
/* /*
* Process options only when we get SYN/ACK back. The SYN case * Process options only when we get SYN/ACK back. The SYN case
* for incoming connections is handled in tcp_syncache. * for incoming connections is handled in tcp_syncache.
* According to RFC1323 the window field in a SYN (i.e., a <SYN> * According to RFC1323 the window field in a SYN (i.e., a <SYN>
* or <SYN,ACK>) segment itself is never scaled. * or <SYN,ACK>) segment itself is never scaled.
* XXX this is traditional behavior, may need to be cleaned up. * XXX this is traditional behavior, may need to be cleaned up.
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 136 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines if (tlen == 0) {
(to.to_flags & TOF_SACK) == 0 && (to.to_flags & TOF_SACK) == 0 &&
TAILQ_EMPTY(&tp->snd_holes)) { TAILQ_EMPTY(&tp->snd_holes)) {
/* /*
* This is a pure ack for outstanding data. * This is a pure ack for outstanding data.
*/ */
TCPSTAT_INC(tcps_predack); TCPSTAT_INC(tcps_predack);
/* /*
* "bad retransmit" recovery without timestamps. * "bad retransmit" recovery.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 && if (tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID && tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 && tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin)) { (((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
to.to_tsecr != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) ||
((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin))))
cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR); cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);
}
/* /*
* Recalculate the transmit timer / rtt. * Recalculate the transmit timer / rtt.
* *
* Some boxes send broken timestamp replies * Some boxes send broken timestamp replies
rscheffUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Any specific reason to write the or statement as two separate if clauses?

I believe in other parts we do it ((true & x & y & z) | (false & a & b &c )) - as multiline checks;

I don't like them both get executed "always", so at the very least, an "else" just before the 2nd if would be good.

The logic looks ok to me.

rscheff: Any specific reason to write the or statement as two separate if clauses? I believe in other…
glebiusUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

I agree with Richard, better one complex if clause. The two clauses are mutually exclusive as one wants TOF_TS and other !TOF_TS, so cc_cong_signal() can be executed only once. My first reading was that it is intentionally written this way cause we may want two calls into cc_cong_singal(), so it was a misleading reading.

Oh, the upper level embracing if can also be merged into one big clause:

if ((tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
    tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
    tp->t_badrxtwin != 0) &&
    (((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
    (to.to_tsecr != 0) &&
    TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) ||
    ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 &&
    TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin))))
        cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);

This will also fix lines longer than 79 chars. IMHO, we may slightly violate style(9) and add single space indentation to highlight our three main large blocks (a && (b || c)).

glebius: I agree with Richard, better one complex if clause. The two clauses are mutually exclusive as…
tuexenAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Now using one and two spaces of indentation to make the expression more readable.

tuexen: Now using one and two spaces of indentation to make the expression more readable.
tuexenAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

It was a try to break things up for improved readability by humans.

tuexen: It was a try to break things up for improved readability by humans.
* during the SYN+ACK phase, ignore * during the SYN+ACK phase, ignore
* timestamps of 0 or we could calculate a * timestamps of 0 or we could calculate a
* huge RTT and blow up the retransmit timer. * huge RTT and blow up the retransmit timer.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 && if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
to.to_tsecr) { to.to_tsecr) {
uint32_t t; uint32_t t;
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 2,424 Lines • Show Last 20 Lines
View Options

head/sysutils/backuppc/files/patch-doc-BackupPC.pod

Show First 20 Lines • Show All 1,629 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines#endif
* fall back to non RFC1323 RTT calculation. Normalize * fall back to non RFC1323 RTT calculation. Normalize
* timestamp if syncookies were used when this connection * timestamp if syncookies were used when this connection
* was established. * was established.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) && (to.to_tsecr != 0)) { if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) && (to.to_tsecr != 0)) {
to.to_tsecr -= tp->ts_offset; to.to_tsecr -= tp->ts_offset;
if (TSTMP_GT(to.to_tsecr, tcp_ts_getticks())) { if (TSTMP_GT(to.to_tsecr, tcp_ts_getticks())) {
to.to_tsecr = 0; to.to_tsecr = 0;
} else if (tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) {
cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);
} }
} }
/* /*
* Process options only when we get SYN/ACK back. The SYN case * Process options only when we get SYN/ACK back. The SYN case
* for incoming connections is handled in tcp_syncache. * for incoming connections is handled in tcp_syncache.
* According to RFC1323 the window field in a SYN (i.e., a <SYN> * According to RFC1323 the window field in a SYN (i.e., a <SYN>
* or <SYN,ACK>) segment itself is never scaled. * or <SYN,ACK>) segment itself is never scaled.
* XXX this is traditional behavior, may need to be cleaned up. * XXX this is traditional behavior, may need to be cleaned up.
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 136 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines if (tlen == 0) {
(to.to_flags & TOF_SACK) == 0 && (to.to_flags & TOF_SACK) == 0 &&
TAILQ_EMPTY(&tp->snd_holes)) { TAILQ_EMPTY(&tp->snd_holes)) {
/* /*
* This is a pure ack for outstanding data. * This is a pure ack for outstanding data.
*/ */
TCPSTAT_INC(tcps_predack); TCPSTAT_INC(tcps_predack);
/* /*
* "bad retransmit" recovery without timestamps. * "bad retransmit" recovery.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 && if (tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID && tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 && tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin)) { (((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
to.to_tsecr != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) ||
((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin))))
cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR); cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);
}
/* /*
* Recalculate the transmit timer / rtt. * Recalculate the transmit timer / rtt.
* *
* Some boxes send broken timestamp replies * Some boxes send broken timestamp replies
rscheffUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Any specific reason to write the or statement as two separate if clauses?

I believe in other parts we do it ((true & x & y & z) | (false & a & b &c )) - as multiline checks;

I don't like them both get executed "always", so at the very least, an "else" just before the 2nd if would be good.

The logic looks ok to me.

rscheff: Any specific reason to write the or statement as two separate if clauses? I believe in other…
glebiusUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

I agree with Richard, better one complex if clause. The two clauses are mutually exclusive as one wants TOF_TS and other !TOF_TS, so cc_cong_signal() can be executed only once. My first reading was that it is intentionally written this way cause we may want two calls into cc_cong_singal(), so it was a misleading reading.

Oh, the upper level embracing if can also be merged into one big clause:

if ((tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
    tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
    tp->t_badrxtwin != 0) &&
    (((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
    (to.to_tsecr != 0) &&
    TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) ||
    ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 &&
    TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin))))
        cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);

This will also fix lines longer than 79 chars. IMHO, we may slightly violate style(9) and add single space indentation to highlight our three main large blocks (a && (b || c)).

glebius: I agree with Richard, better one complex if clause. The two clauses are mutually exclusive as…
tuexenAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Now using one and two spaces of indentation to make the expression more readable.

tuexen: Now using one and two spaces of indentation to make the expression more readable.
tuexenAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

It was a try to break things up for improved readability by humans.

tuexen: It was a try to break things up for improved readability by humans.
* during the SYN+ACK phase, ignore * during the SYN+ACK phase, ignore
* timestamps of 0 or we could calculate a * timestamps of 0 or we could calculate a
* huge RTT and blow up the retransmit timer. * huge RTT and blow up the retransmit timer.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 && if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
to.to_tsecr) { to.to_tsecr) {
uint32_t t; uint32_t t;
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 2,424 Lines • Show Last 20 Lines
View Options

head/sysutils/backuppc/files/patch-lib_BackupPC_CGI_Browse.pm

Show First 20 Lines • Show All 1,629 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines#endif
* fall back to non RFC1323 RTT calculation. Normalize * fall back to non RFC1323 RTT calculation. Normalize
* timestamp if syncookies were used when this connection * timestamp if syncookies were used when this connection
* was established. * was established.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) && (to.to_tsecr != 0)) { if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) && (to.to_tsecr != 0)) {
to.to_tsecr -= tp->ts_offset; to.to_tsecr -= tp->ts_offset;
if (TSTMP_GT(to.to_tsecr, tcp_ts_getticks())) { if (TSTMP_GT(to.to_tsecr, tcp_ts_getticks())) {
to.to_tsecr = 0; to.to_tsecr = 0;
} else if (tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) {
cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);
} }
} }
/* /*
* Process options only when we get SYN/ACK back. The SYN case * Process options only when we get SYN/ACK back. The SYN case
* for incoming connections is handled in tcp_syncache. * for incoming connections is handled in tcp_syncache.
* According to RFC1323 the window field in a SYN (i.e., a <SYN> * According to RFC1323 the window field in a SYN (i.e., a <SYN>
* or <SYN,ACK>) segment itself is never scaled. * or <SYN,ACK>) segment itself is never scaled.
* XXX this is traditional behavior, may need to be cleaned up. * XXX this is traditional behavior, may need to be cleaned up.
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 136 Lines • ▼ Show 20 Lines if (tlen == 0) {
(to.to_flags & TOF_SACK) == 0 && (to.to_flags & TOF_SACK) == 0 &&
TAILQ_EMPTY(&tp->snd_holes)) { TAILQ_EMPTY(&tp->snd_holes)) {
/* /*
* This is a pure ack for outstanding data. * This is a pure ack for outstanding data.
*/ */
TCPSTAT_INC(tcps_predack); TCPSTAT_INC(tcps_predack);
/* /*
* "bad retransmit" recovery without timestamps. * "bad retransmit" recovery.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 && if (tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID && tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 && tp->t_badrxtwin != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin)) { (((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
to.to_tsecr != 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) ||
((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 &&
TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin))))
cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR); cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);
}
/* /*
* Recalculate the transmit timer / rtt. * Recalculate the transmit timer / rtt.
* *
* Some boxes send broken timestamp replies * Some boxes send broken timestamp replies
rscheffUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Any specific reason to write the or statement as two separate if clauses?

I believe in other parts we do it ((true & x & y & z) | (false & a & b &c )) - as multiline checks;

I don't like them both get executed "always", so at the very least, an "else" just before the 2nd if would be good.

The logic looks ok to me.

rscheff: Any specific reason to write the or statement as two separate if clauses? I believe in other…
glebiusUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

I agree with Richard, better one complex if clause. The two clauses are mutually exclusive as one wants TOF_TS and other !TOF_TS, so cc_cong_signal() can be executed only once. My first reading was that it is intentionally written this way cause we may want two calls into cc_cong_singal(), so it was a misleading reading.

Oh, the upper level embracing if can also be merged into one big clause:

if ((tp->t_rxtshift == 1 &&
    tp->t_flags & TF_PREVVALID &&
    tp->t_badrxtwin != 0) &&
    (((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
    (to.to_tsecr != 0) &&
    TSTMP_LT(to.to_tsecr, tp->t_badrxtwin)) ||
    ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) == 0 &&
    TSTMP_LT(ticks, tp->t_badrxtwin))))
        cc_cong_signal(tp, th, CC_RTO_ERR);

This will also fix lines longer than 79 chars. IMHO, we may slightly violate style(9) and add single space indentation to highlight our three main large blocks (a && (b || c)).

glebius: I agree with Richard, better one complex if clause. The two clauses are mutually exclusive as…
tuexenAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

Now using one and two spaces of indentation to make the expression more readable.

tuexen: Now using one and two spaces of indentation to make the expression more readable.
tuexenAuthorUnsubmitted
Done
Inline Actions

It was a try to break things up for improved readability by humans.

tuexen: It was a try to break things up for improved readability by humans.
* during the SYN+ACK phase, ignore * during the SYN+ACK phase, ignore
* timestamps of 0 or we could calculate a * timestamps of 0 or we could calculate a
* huge RTT and blow up the retransmit timer. * huge RTT and blow up the retransmit timer.
*/ */
if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 && if ((to.to_flags & TOF_TS) != 0 &&
to.to_tsecr) { to.to_tsecr) {
uint32_t t; uint32_t t;
▲ Show 20 Lines • Show All 2,424 Lines • Show Last 20 Lines
View Options

head/sysutils/backuppc/files/patch-lib_BackupPC_Lib.pm

Loading...
View Options

head/sysutils/backuppc/files/patch-lib_BackupPC_Xfer_Smb.pm

Loading...
View Options

head/sysutils/backuppc/files/patch-lib__BackupPC__CGI__View.pm

Loading...
View Options

head/sysutils/backuppc/files/patch-update.pl

Loading...
View Options

head/sysutils/backuppc/files/pkg-message.in

Loading...