On Fri, Dec 05, 2025 at 03:36:23PM +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote: > This is an approximation, as enabling SO_KEEPALIVE doesn't mean that > a keep-alive segment will be sent right away, rather that keep-alive > segments will start being sent if the connection is idle. > > On the other hand, we don't have direct control over the host-side > TCP, so this is probably the best approximation we can get. > > By default, namespaces inherit keep-alive parameters from their parent > namespace, so we can assume that, in case of a container, we'll wait > for the same interval it took for the container to start sending us > keep-alives, effectively doubling that interval. > > To keep this simple, set SO_KEEPALIVE whenever we see a keep-alive > segment, instead of tracking its state. Keep-alive segments are > relatively infrequent, so we don't expect any substantial cost from > doing that. > > Reported-by: Dominic Kohls > Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio Reviewed-by: David Gibson > --- > v2: Coverity Scan just reminded me that we shouldn't ignore > setsockopt() return codes. It doesn't really matter if this fails > as we can't do much else in that case, but a trace-level message > is a good idea anyway (not that I've ever seen this failing). > > tcp.c | 4 ++++ > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tcp.c b/tcp.c > index 8357c0e..d6a5337 100644 > --- a/tcp.c > +++ b/tcp.c > @@ -1838,6 +1838,10 @@ 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 (setsockopt(conn->sock, SOL_SOCKET, SO_KEEPALIVE, > + &((int){ 1 }), sizeof(int))) > + flow_trace(conn, "failed to set SO_KEEPALIVE"); > + > if (p->count == 1) { > tcp_tap_window_update(c, conn, > ntohs(th->window)); > -- > 2.43.0 > -- 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