From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: passt.top; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: passt.top; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=A95R1Nud; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by passt.top (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87B895A026F for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 08:32:49 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1761723168; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=cK8u8enyKJ9Od94eUS6UGrNK8AlICtC+Cu/ECSr33ew=; b=A95R1NudqR/2k1AP/iwwcC+JSlhR133koEFvm3w942zsBIXGUxO5jGUVMu85cF6lM2fziU Z570NdInA8PrGIuU79iqU5knA5qC5XPI1/O+yjHhdTth80Gl6nuuH3JCESkI/uUi1RgPOB vm2QWvodEQ7/hplnUFZNrY7tl2K4UoM= Received: from mail-ed1-f72.google.com (mail-ed1-f72.google.com [209.85.208.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-22-2N5xSP5BPMyORIR_Tmq7ww-1; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 03:32:46 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 2N5xSP5BPMyORIR_Tmq7ww-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: 2N5xSP5BPMyORIR_Tmq7ww_1761723166 Received: by mail-ed1-f72.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-63c7f8f0405so6440534a12.1 for ; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 00:32:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1761723165; x=1762327965; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=cK8u8enyKJ9Od94eUS6UGrNK8AlICtC+Cu/ECSr33ew=; b=kPmVp3csZiyRzgrO3pszP7Zt5N1UyaT2WZYp78jJi4WAosw2KFrLpMURqS198CHWX1 5IAKFd5FmLxwQIy6z3br0BLRvkPbr2kmGVn1M5zwP0+fUl6LLFJpQxOY3FtswhWXKpM1 VOwBjSYMt7CSuK37WsHC7A6CNuU7BzYKJvZfNefoGQ8fB2RJiVN7cKTxiq51vWqXznc1 NmvoQw3pBfFlVXu9TAfHhQ/Mwgpl3HDfm9CT62UV1r3o34v47lIsDtSk1alIbNyIQjUU WcszvaXEfBY2UZKDDzCNvLk4COAxilUalGjGHzf4xrdL1F394ifcsuYu47vCvrtfjXOQ ULug== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwsL9ngTiU10dhAi12sHX0dEMzUuarNWFuKKa2rAnP56+Ilae2z vLmw0GjhRL21PKQX1tx6m5psXTtNX6OqQquNqf3IP9lduk5gxBX/GemyIFqZ3Rt6XmukpU2dDiT 40iSSfEPZITnV7OlGLwv5gWxWXvdLHy42m7Hf3NIWCmLyEhvcDCM1IrPRScy6mkXpSwWauaM4yb COAgNi1aJQ72dx0ilQ1cAYOHx3RUO6 X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuANjYbxUbHtABHbMBXr6tEK+UkkNra0bqR22QICg6YnGom530f1/+3zlXWIqR fBwt/5z857vj7gKVFbbhdDS/4brjnYJCkCvfGd3zfyglDpgWku7Q1uP2D3g+Uyd/VqgElJYEnvQ XlWRcZdNmvoTHj8eKYuaAiyAF07U1Gg/7BnCLe3d5w4+LnhW2lC5D1QKON X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:210d:b0:63b:e668:b099 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-6404419e89bmr1469223a12.2.1761723165538; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 00:32:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFh2E9tn+qZ+xz0N4DWWEhS4AyZHp+fj3TwjAG2xOAnYJ2IW8FgiICS71fQwydkCpLHYz9ed+BsOnBiPtWpa+Y= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:210d:b0:63b:e668:b099 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-6404419e89bmr1469213a12.2.1761723165003; Wed, 29 Oct 2025 00:32:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20251017062838.21041-1-yuhuang@redhat.com> <20251017062838.21041-5-yuhuang@redhat.com> <20251024010438.16e19757@elisabeth> <20251028124426.534fd236@elisabeth> <20251029053804.711716aa@elisabeth> <20251029080953.4f671f56@elisabeth> In-Reply-To: <20251029080953.4f671f56@elisabeth> From: Yumei Huang Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 15:32:33 +0800 X-Gm-Features: AWmQ_bml_wckRD23B_zfYK_VKmj4RdrEkzQM7FrVLgFuM2nhAzhMM2dXXrIQX64 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/4] tcp: Update data retransmission timeout To: Stefano Brivio X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: JCxLEX-_8c7Ecb20w99keU4WY0T8fzq4wRUfnATzhVw_1761723166 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-ID-Hash: NHEVV4A2RXXUDEMPVQUHR7FDJPM6HGSE X-Message-ID-Hash: NHEVV4A2RXXUDEMPVQUHR7FDJPM6HGSE X-MailFrom: yuhuang@redhat.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: passt-dev@passt.top, david@gibson.dropbear.id.au X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.8 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion and patches for passt Archived-At: Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 3:10=E2=80=AFPM Stefano Brivio = wrote: > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2025 13:11:48 +0800 > Yumei Huang wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 12:38=E2=80=AFPM Stefano Brivio wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2025 11:06:44 +0800 > > > Yumei Huang wrote: > > > > > > > On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 7:44=E2=80=AFPM Stefano Brivio wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, 28 Oct 2025 16:09:03 +0800 > > > > > Yumei Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 24, 2025 at 7:04=E2=80=AFAM Stefano Brivio wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Oct 2025 14:28:38 +0800 > > > > > > > Yumei Huang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Use an exponential backoff timeout for data retransmission = according > > > > > > > > to RFC 2988 and RFC 6298. Set the initial RTO to one second= as discussed > > > > > > > > in Appendix A of RFC 6298. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also combine the macros defining the initial RTO for both S= YN and ACK. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Yumei Huang > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: David Gibson > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > tcp.c | 27 ++++++++++++--------------- > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/tcp.c b/tcp.c > > > > > > > > index 9385132..dc0ec6c 100644 > > > > > > > > --- a/tcp.c > > > > > > > > +++ b/tcp.c > > > > > > > > @@ -179,16 +179,14 @@ > > > > > > > > * > > > > > > > > * Timeouts are implemented by means of timerfd timers, se= t based on flags: > > > > > > > > * > > > > > > > > - * - SYN_TIMEOUT_INIT: if no ACK is received from tap/gues= t during handshake > > > > > > > > - * (flag ACK_FROM_TAP_DUE without ESTABLISHED event) wit= hin this time, resend > > > > > > > > - * SYN. It's the starting timeout for the first SYN retr= y. If this persists > > > > > > > > - * for more than TCP_MAX_RETRIES or (tcp_syn_retries + > > > > > > > > - * tcp_syn_linear_timeouts) times in a row, reset the co= nnection > > > > > > > > - * > > > > > > > > - * - ACK_TIMEOUT: if no ACK segment was received from tap/= guest, after sending > > > > > > > > - * data (flag ACK_FROM_TAP_DUE with ESTABLISHED event), = re-send data from the > > > > > > > > - * socket and reset sequence to what was acknowledged. I= f this persists for > > > > > > > > - * more than TCP_MAX_RETRIES times in a row, reset the c= onnection > > > > > > > > + * - RTO_INIT: if no ACK segment was received from tap/gue= st, either during > > > > > > > > + * handshake (flag ACK_FROM_TAP_DUE without ESTABLISHED = event) or after > > > > > > > > + * sending data (flag ACK_FROM_TAP_DUE with ESTABLISHED = event), re-send data > > > > > > > > + * from the socket and reset sequence to what was acknow= ledged. This is the > > > > > > > > + * timeout for the first retry, in seconds. If this pers= ists too many times > > > > > > > > + * in a row, reset the connection: TCP_MAX_RETRIES for e= stablished > > > > > > > > + * connections, or (tcp_syn_retries + tcp_syn_linear_tim= eouts) during the > > > > > > > > + * handshake. > > > > > > > > * > > > > > > > > * - FIN_TIMEOUT: if a FIN segment was sent to tap/guest (= flag ACK_FROM_TAP_DUE > > > > > > > > * with TAP_FIN_SENT event), and no ACK is received with= in this time, reset > > > > > > > > @@ -342,8 +340,7 @@ enum { > > > > > > > > #define WINDOW_DEFAULT 14600 = /* RFC 6928 */ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > #define ACK_INTERVAL 10 /* ms= */ > > > > > > > > -#define SYN_TIMEOUT_INIT 1 /* s = */ > > > > > > > > -#define ACK_TIMEOUT 2 > > > > > > > > +#define RTO_INIT 1 /* s,= RFC 6298 */ > > > > > > > > #define FIN_TIMEOUT 60 > > > > > > > > #define ACT_TIMEOUT 7200 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @@ -588,13 +585,13 @@ static void tcp_timer_ctl(const struc= t ctx *c, struct tcp_tap_conn *conn) > > > > > > > > } else if (conn->flags & ACK_FROM_TAP_DUE) { > > > > > > > > if (!(conn->events & ESTABLISHED)) { > > > > > > > > if (conn->retries < c->tcp.syn_linear= _timeouts) > > > > > > > > - it.it_value.tv_sec =3D SYN_TI= MEOUT_INIT; > > > > > > > > + it.it_value.tv_sec =3D RTO_IN= IT; > > > > > > > > else > > > > > > > > - it.it_value.tv_sec =3D SYN_TI= MEOUT_INIT << > > > > > > > > + it.it_value.tv_sec =3D RTO_IN= IT << > > > > > > > > (conn->retries - c->t= cp.syn_linear_timeouts); > > > > > > > > } > > > > > > > > else > > > > > > > > - it.it_value.tv_sec =3D ACK_TIMEOUT; > > > > > > > > + it.it_value.tv_sec =3D RTO_INIT << co= nn->retries; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Same as on 3/4, but here it's clearly more convenient: just a= ssign > > > > > > > RTO_INIT, and multiply as needed in the if / else clauses. > > > > > > > > > > > > I guess we can't just assign RTO_INIT. Maybe assign it only wh= en > > > > > > retries=3D=3D0, otherwise multiply as it.it_value.tv_sec <<=3D1= . > > > > > > > > > > Why can't you do that? Say: > > > > > > > > > > it.it_value.tv_sec =3D RTO_INIT > > > > > if (!(conn->events & ESTABLISHED)) { > > > > > if (conn->retries >=3D c->tcp.syn_linear_timeouts= ) > > > > > it.it_value.tv_sec <<=3D (conn->retries - > > > > > c->tcp.syn_linear= _timeouts); > > > > > > > > > > but anyway, see below. > > > > > > > > > > > But it seems more complicated. What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > Or maybe, building on my latest comment to 3/4: > > > > > > > > > > int factor =3D conn->retries; > > > > > > > > > > if (!(conn->events & ESTABLISHED)) > > > > > factor -=3D c->tcp.syn_linear_timeouts; > > > > > > > > > > it.it_value.tv_sec =3D RTO_INIT << MAX(factor, 0)= ; > > > > > > > > > > ? > > > > > > > > Yeah, I understand this part now. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > } else if (CONN_HAS(conn, SOCK_FIN_SENT | TAP_FIN_ACK= ED)) { > > > > > > > > it.it_value.tv_sec =3D FIN_TIMEOUT; > > > > > > > > } else { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The rest of the series looks good to me. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It might be slightly more practical to factor in directly the= RTO > > > > > > > clamp, and I don't think it's complicated now that you have t= he helper > > > > > > > from 2/4, but it's not a strong preference from my side, as t= he series > > > > > > > makes sense in any case. > > > > > > > > > > > > Reading tcp_rto_max_ms can be easy with the helper. My concern = is > > > > > > about the way we get the total time for retries. > > > > > > > > > > > > I used to do it like this in v2, > > > > > > https://archives.passt.top/passt-dev/20251010074700.22177-4-yuh= uang@redhat.com/: > > > > > > > > > > > > +#define RETRY_ELAPSED(timeout_init, retries) \ > > > > > > + ((timeout_init) * ((1 << ((retries) + 1)) - 2)) > > > > > > > > > > > > Though the formula is not quite right, we could refine it as be= low: > > > > > > > > > > > > #define RETRY_ELAPSED(retries) ((RTO_INIT) * ((1 << ((retries) = + 1)) - 1)) > > > > > > > > > > > > Does it make sense to get the time this way? > > > > > > > > > > Well, it also depends on c->tcp.syn_linear_timeouts, right? > > > > > > > > Not really, it's only used for data retransmission, so > > > > syn_linear_timeouts is not relevant. > > > > > > Hmm, no, why? RFC 6298 covers SYN retries as well, and that's the one > > > stating: > > > > I meant RETRY_ELAPSED was only used for data retransmission, which > > uses exponential backoff timeout directly, so syn_linear_timeouts was > > not relevant. > > Ah, okay. > > > > > > > (2.5) A maximum value MAY be placed on RTO provided it is at least= 60 > > > seconds. > > > > For SYN retries, as we used linear backoff + exponential backoff, and > > also limited by TCP_MAX_RETRIES, the possible max RTO is far less than > > 60s. So we didn't clamp it. Do you think we need to clamp it as well? > > If syn_linear_timeouts is 0 and tcp_syn_retries is 7, I guess we'll > reach 2^0 + 2^1 + 2^2 + 2^3 + 2^4 + 2^5 + 2^6 + 2^7 =3D 247 seconds? Or > just up to ... + 2^6, that is, 119 seconds? > > In any case, what is the difference compared to data retransmissions? You are right. I assumed wrongly that syn_linear_timeouts is always 4. When it's 0, it's the same as data retransmissions. > > Don't we have 3 bits to store the retry count as well, so we're limited > by TCP_MAX_RETRIES anyway? Looking at patch 1/4 I'd say it's the same > counter. Yes, it's the same counter. I guess you mean we should clamp it as well. > > > > ...the only thing that I don't see implemented in this version of the > > > patch is paragraph 5.7: > > > > > > (5.7) If the timer expires awaiting the ACK of a SYN segment and t= he > > > TCP implementation is using an RTO less than 3 seconds, the = RTO > > > MUST be re-initialized to 3 seconds when data transmission > > > begins (i.e., after the three-way handshake completes). > > > > > > I missed that while reviewing earlier versions. I guess we need to us= e > > > a MAX(x, 3) clamp if (c->conn->events & ESTABLISHED). I think it's > > > simpler than re-introducing separate starting values (one second and > > > three seconds). > > > > I'm not sure I understand here. If the timer expires, didn't we reset > > the connection directly? We would never get to the data transmission > > phase? > > In the RFC, "the timer expires" indicates one iteration of the timeout > algorithm, that is, it's the same as our timer (tcp_timer_handler()) > triggering. I see. If you agree, I can add a new patch in this series to address the clamping. > > The paragraph says "after the three-way handshake completes", so it > looks like the connection wasn't reset. > > > > > Probably I should name it more clearly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But in any case, do you really need to calculate that explicitly?= I was > > > > > thinking that you can just clamp the value when you use it in > > > > > tcp_timer_ctl(). > > > > > > > > > > If c->tcp.rto_max is DIV_ROUND_CLOSEST(x, 1000), where 'x' is the= value > > > > > you read from the kernel, then I guess it's just: > > > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > it.it_value.tv_sec =3D MIN(it.it_value.tv_sec, c-= >tcp.rto_max); > > > > > > > > After reading the comments in v3 when tcp_rto_max_ms was first > > > > mentioned again, I realized I got something wrong again. I thought = it > > > > was for the total timeout for all retries, so I need to calculate t= hat > > > > and decide to reset the connection as in v2. > > > > > > I think it actually applies to all the retries. > > > > > > > Anyway, you are right. We don't need to do that. Thanks for your pa= tience. > > > > > > > > > } ... > > > > > > > > > > if (timerfd_settime(conn->timer, 0, &it, NULL)) > > > > > flow_perror(conn, "failed to set timer"); > > > > > --- > > -- > Stefano > --=20 Thanks, Yumei Huang