We used to call it 'master' socket at the early stages of MPTCP
development, but the correct wording is 'MPTCP' socket opposed to 'TCP
subflows': convert the last 3 comments to use a more appropriate term.
Signed-off-by: Davide Caratti <dcaratti@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
if (skb_queue_empty(&msk->receive_queue) && __mptcp_move_skbs(msk))
continue;
- /* only the master socket status is relevant here. The exit
+ /* only the MPTCP socket status is relevant here. The exit
* conditions mirror closely tcp_recvmsg()
*/
if (copied >= target)
static int mptcp_hash(struct sock *sk)
{
/* should never be called,
- * we hash the TCP subflows not the master socket
+ * we hash the TCP subflows not the MPTCP socket
*/
WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
return 0;
mptcp_sockopt_sync_locked(mptcp_sk(sk), sf->sk);
release_sock(sf->sk);
- /* the newly created socket really belongs to the owning MPTCP master
+ /* the newly created socket really belongs to the owning MPTCP
* socket, even if for additional subflows the allocation is performed
* by a kernel workqueue. Adjust inode references, so that the
* procfs/diag interfaces really show this one belonging to the correct