Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

rbuf: does not remove oldest entry if we have entry for current fragment #4771

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 4, 2016

Conversation

Yonezawa-T2
Copy link
Contributor

If all rbuf slots are in use, _rbuf_gc removes the oldest entry even if the entry for the current fragment exists. This effectively decreases usable slots by one. This patch makes _rbuf_gc removes the oldest entry only if there is no entry for the current fragment.
Depends on #4770.
This is a remainder of #4547.

@Yonezawa-T2 Yonezawa-T2 added Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation Area: network Area: Networking State: waiting for other PR State: The PR requires another PR to be merged first labels Feb 9, 2016
@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Feb 9, 2016

This PR should be able to be independent from #4770

@miri64 miri64 added this to the Release 2016.03 milestone Feb 9, 2016
@miri64 miri64 self-assigned this Feb 9, 2016
@Yonezawa-T2
Copy link
Contributor Author

Semantically, this patch is independent from #4770, but diff hunks overlap. Once #4770 is merged, I will rebase the branch.

@Yonezawa-T2
Copy link
Contributor Author

Rebased. Now independent from #4770.

@OlegHahm
Copy link
Member

@authmillenon, did you find time to review?

@OlegHahm OlegHahm added the Community: Hack'n'ACK candidate This PR is a candidate for review and discussion during one of RIOT's monthly Hack'n'ACK parties label Feb 27, 2016
@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Feb 28, 2016

Will use the Hack'n'ACK for that.

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Mar 2, 2016

I actually DID review it yesterday but somehow forgot to comment: Looks good code-wise, but I'm not sure how to test. :-)

@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Mar 2, 2016

(I guess if fragmentation is still working we are fine, will test so)

@miri64 miri64 added CI: needs squashing Commits in this PR need to be squashed; If set, CI systems will mark this PR as unmergable and removed State: waiting for other PR State: The PR requires another PR to be merged first labels Mar 2, 2016
@miri64
Copy link
Member

miri64 commented Mar 2, 2016

Reassembly still works: ACK. Please squash.

@miri64 miri64 added the CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR label Mar 2, 2016
If all rbuf slots are in use, `_rbuf_gc` removes the oldest entry even if the
entry for the current fragment exists. This effectively decreases usable slots
by one. This patch makes `_rbuf_gc` removes the oldest entry only if there is
no entry for the current fragment.
@Yonezawa-T2
Copy link
Contributor Author

Squashed.

@OlegHahm OlegHahm removed the CI: needs squashing Commits in this PR need to be squashed; If set, CI systems will mark this PR as unmergable label Mar 3, 2016
miri64 added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 4, 2016
rbuf: does not remove oldest entry if we have entry for current fragment
@miri64 miri64 merged commit 4504e40 into RIOT-OS:master Mar 4, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Area: network Area: Networking CI: ready for build If set, CI server will compile all applications for all available boards for the labeled PR Community: Hack'n'ACK candidate This PR is a candidate for review and discussion during one of RIOT's monthly Hack'n'ACK parties Type: enhancement The issue suggests enhanceable parts / The PR enhances parts of the codebase / documentation
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants