From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
To: Jon Maloy <jmaloy@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org,
passt-dev@passt.top, sbrivio@redhat.com, lvivier@redhat.com,
dgibson@redhat.com, memnglong8.dong@gmail.com,
kerneljasonxing@gmail.com, ncardwell@google.com,
eric.dumazet@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [net,v3] tcp: correct handling of extreme memory squeeze
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2025 18:11:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CANn89i+YRqgg7YncrvRhisqBP8PZcrykNnUUF+tguaMEJG340Q@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <415dde0a-2272-45d2-8fa8-473fe7637a78@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jan 28, 2025 at 5:51 PM Jon Maloy <jmaloy@redhat.com> wrote:
> I clearly stated in a previous comment that this was the case, and that
> it has been fixed now. My reason for posting this is because I still
> think this is a bug, just as I think the way we use rcv_ssthresh in
> _tcp_select)window() is a bug that eventually should be fixed.
I was referring to a wrong statement in the changelog, claiming a
'deadlock situation' ...
It is pretty clear there is no deadlock here, unless the remote TCP
stack is _absolutely_ _broken_.
If you still want to capture this in an official changelog, it would
be nice to clarify this,
to avoid yet another CVE to be filled based on scary sentences
misleading many teams
in the world.
Keep changelogs accurate and factual, so that we can find useful
signals in them.
All your __tcp_cleanup_rbuf() repetitions are simply noise. It does not matter
if it is called once or ten times.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-28 17:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-27 23:13 [net,v3] tcp: correct handling of extreme memory squeeze jmaloy
2025-01-28 0:52 ` Jason Xing
2025-01-28 15:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-28 15:18 ` Stefano Brivio
2025-01-28 15:56 ` Neal Cardwell
2025-01-28 16:01 ` Eric Dumazet
2025-01-28 16:51 ` Jon Maloy
2025-01-28 17:11 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2025-01-30 3:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CANn89i+YRqgg7YncrvRhisqBP8PZcrykNnUUF+tguaMEJG340Q@mail.gmail.com \
--to=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dgibson@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=jmaloy@redhat.com \
--cc=kerneljasonxing@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=memnglong8.dong@gmail.com \
--cc=ncardwell@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=passt-dev@passt.top \
--cc=sbrivio@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://passt.top/passt
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for IMAP folder(s).