From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
Cc: passt-dev@passt.top, Jon Maloy <jmaloy@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: Don't discard window information on keep-alive segments
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2025 11:42:54 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z6vujvE5CUUVlgme@zatzit> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250211195051.197798-1-sbrivio@redhat.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2129 bytes --]
On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 08:50:51PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> It looks like a detail, but it's critical if we're dealing with
> somebody, such as near-future self, using TCP_REPAIR to migrate TCP
> connections in the guest or container.
>
> The last packet sent from the 'source' process/guest/container
> typically reports a small window, or zero, because the guest/container
> hadn't been draining it for a while.
>
> The next packet, appearing as the target sets TCP_REPAIR_OFF on the
> migrated socket, is a keep-alive (also called "window probe" in CRIU
> or TCP_REPAIR-related code), and it comes with an updated window
> value, reflecting the pre-migration "regular" value.
>
> If we ignore it, it might take a while/forever before we realise we
> can actually restart sending.
>
> Fixes: 238c69f9af45 ("tcp: Acknowledge keep-alive segments, ignore them for the rest")
> Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
Although...
> ---
> tcp.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tcp.c b/tcp.c
> index af6bd95..2addf4a 100644
> --- a/tcp.c
> +++ b/tcp.c
> @@ -1664,8 +1664,10 @@ static int tcp_data_from_tap(const struct ctx *c, struct tcp_tap_conn *conn,
> tcp_send_flag(c, conn, ACK);
> tcp_timer_ctl(c, conn);
>
> - if (p->count == 1)
> + if (p->count == 1) {
... not really this patch, but this condition seems wrong to me. IIUC
it's attempting to detect the last packet in the batch, which isn't
necessarily the same thing as the _only_ packet in the batch.
Admittedly, it probably will be for a keep-alive, but I'm having a
hard time convincing myself it absolutely has to be.
Should this maybe be (i + 1 == p->count) instead?
> + tcp_tap_window_update(conn, ntohs(th->window));
> return 1;
> + }
>
> continue;
> }
--
David Gibson (he or they) | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you, not the other way
| around.
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-12 0:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-11 19:50 [PATCH] tcp: Don't discard window information on keep-alive segments Stefano Brivio
2025-02-12 0:42 ` David Gibson [this message]
2025-02-12 1:20 ` Stefano Brivio
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=Z6vujvE5CUUVlgme@zatzit \
--to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=jmaloy@redhat.com \
--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).