[syslinux] [PATCH 3/4] Removing the udp_reader efi_binding

[Ady Ady]

> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:06 AM, Matt Fleming <matt at codeblueprint.co.uk> wrote:
> > On Wed, 31 May, at 07:45:00AM, Gene Cumm wrote:
> >> >  extern EFI_GUID Udp4ServiceBindingProtocol, Udp4Protocol;
> >> >
> >> > -/*
> >> > - * This UDP binding is configured to operate in promiscuous mode. It is
> >> > - * only used for reading packets. It has no associated state unlike
> >> > - * socket->net.efi.binding, which has a remote IP address and port
> >> > - * number.
> >> > - */
> >>
> >> This part has me puzzled why Matt was creating a promiscuous binding
> >> instead of re-using the existing binding.
> >
> > Sorry, I'm afraid I don't remember what I was thinking when I wrote
> > that, so I definitely have no problem with it being ripped out.
> 
> Gotta love git.  git blame has me thinking it's leftovers from
> fe283b78c that weren't cleaned up in c5c37402
> 
> It sure looks like it's needed.
> 
> -- 
> -Gene
 
Since you mentioned commit c5c37402, which affects not only efi/udp.c 
but also core/fs/pxe/pxe.h, I'd like to remind you about a few of 
Michael Brown's latest proposed patches for Syslinux:


_ pxe: Never chain to the original ISR
 http://www.syslinux.org/archives/2017-March/025620.html 


_ core/lwip: Avoid 3-second delay for a half-open connection
 http://www.syslinux.org/archives/2016-July/025277.html 

 http://www.syslinux.org/archives/2016-July/025279.html 


_ core/lwip: Avoid immediate reuse of UDP port numbers
 http://www.syslinux.org/archives/2016-July/025278.html 

 http://www.syslinux.org/archives/2016-July/025280.html 


Quoting GeneC:
 "These seem very relevant to some of the reported issues."

AFAIK, then nothing happened with them.

Considering that the 2 patches proposed by Michael Brown during July 
2016 were integrated in upstream lwIP already, perhaps it's time to 
(also) update the (by now, 6-year-old) lwip code included in Syslinux 
too (or at least to its latest 1.x version and then add Michael Brown's 
proposed patches).

At any rate, The Syslinux Project would benefit if proposed patches 
would be actually considered and discussed with contributors.

Regards,
Ady.