Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-20969-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley
	Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United
	Kingdom.
	Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903
From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB9dFdteL97Z8GAry9TwmcOfw0+PQDzL_u14PwwAEq5uUHaUkQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAB9dFdteL97Z8GAry9TwmcOfw0+PQDzL_u14PwwAEq5uUHaUkQ@mail.gmail.com> <1570781.1704797483@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
To: Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com>
Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
    Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
    Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org,
    netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] rxrpc: Fix use of Don't Fragment flag
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1577953.1704809777.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2024 14:16:17 +0000
Message-ID: <1577954.1704809777@warthog.procyon.org.uk>

Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@auristor.com> wrote:

> > +{
> > +       if (set)
> > +               ip_sock_set_mtu_discover(local->socket->sk, IP_PMTUDIS=
C_DONT);
> > +       else
> > +               ip_sock_set_mtu_discover(local->socket->sk, IP_PMTUDIS=
C_DO);
> > +}
> =

> Shouldn't those be reversed - don't fragment should be IP_PMTUDISC_DO?

Meh.  Yes.

> Also, and this is probably already an issue with current code, I don't
> think this is effective if the socket is V6, which it will be in most
> cases.

Hmmm...  I guess I should tweak IPV6_MTU_DISCOVER also.

David