Re: [PATCH net] tcp: fix tcp_mtu_probe() vs highest_sack

2017-11-03 Thread Eric Dumazet
On Fri, 2017-11-03 at 19:22 +0100, Oleksandr Natalenko wrote: > Hi. > > Thanks for the fix. > > However, tcp_fastretrans_alert() warning case still remains open even with > this patch. Do I understand correctly that these are 2 different issues? > > Currently, I use latest 4.13 stable kernel +

Re: [PATCH net] tcp: fix tcp_mtu_probe() vs highest_sack

2017-11-03 Thread Oleksandr Natalenko
Hi. Thanks for the fix. However, tcp_fastretrans_alert() warning case still remains open even with this patch. Do I understand correctly that these are 2 different issues? Currently, I use latest 4.13 stable kernel + this patch and still get: WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 736 at net/ipv4/tcp_input.c:28

Re: [PATCH net] tcp: fix tcp_mtu_probe() vs highest_sack

2017-11-01 Thread David Miller
From: Eric Dumazet Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 23:08:20 -0700 > From: Eric Dumazet > > Based on SNMP values provided by Roman, Yuchung made the observation > that some crashes in tcp_sacktag_walk() might be caused by MTU probing. > > Looking at tcp_mtu_probe(), I found that when a new skb was place

Re: [PATCH net] tcp: fix tcp_mtu_probe() vs highest_sack

2017-10-31 Thread Yuchung Cheng
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:17 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:08:20PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > From: Eric Dumazet > > > > Based on SNMP values provided by Roman, Yuchung made the observation > > that some crashes in tcp_sacktag_walk() might be caused by MTU prob

Re: [PATCH net] tcp: fix tcp_mtu_probe() vs highest_sack

2017-10-31 Thread Neal Cardwell
On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 2:08 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > From: Eric Dumazet > > Based on SNMP values provided by Roman, Yuchung made the observation > that some crashes in tcp_sacktag_walk() might be caused by MTU probing. > > Looking at tcp_mtu_probe(), I found that when a new skb was placed > in

Re: [PATCH net] tcp: fix tcp_mtu_probe() vs highest_sack

2017-10-30 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:21:42PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Mon, 2017-10-30 at 23:17 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:08:20PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > From: Eric Dumazet > > > > > > Based on SNMP values provided by Roman, Yuchung made the observation

Re: [PATCH net] tcp: fix tcp_mtu_probe() vs highest_sack

2017-10-30 Thread Eric Dumazet
On Mon, 2017-10-30 at 23:17 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:08:20PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > From: Eric Dumazet > > > > Based on SNMP values provided by Roman, Yuchung made the observation > > that some crashes in tcp_sacktag_walk() might be caused by MTU probi

Re: [PATCH net] tcp: fix tcp_mtu_probe() vs highest_sack

2017-10-30 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:08:20PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > From: Eric Dumazet > > Based on SNMP values provided by Roman, Yuchung made the observation > that some crashes in tcp_sacktag_walk() might be caused by MTU probing. > > Looking at tcp_mtu_probe(), I found that when a new skb was pl

[PATCH net] tcp: fix tcp_mtu_probe() vs highest_sack

2017-10-30 Thread Eric Dumazet
From: Eric Dumazet Based on SNMP values provided by Roman, Yuchung made the observation that some crashes in tcp_sacktag_walk() might be caused by MTU probing. Looking at tcp_mtu_probe(), I found that when a new skb was placed in front of the write queue, we were not updating tcp highest sack.