[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101112182959.GA20459@ms2.inr.ac.ru>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 21:29:59 +0300
From: Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
David Lamparter <equinox@...c24.net>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, Hua Zhong <hzhong@...il.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net, pekkas@...core.fi, jmorris@...ei.org,
yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, paul.moore@...com
Subject: Re: a problem tcp_v4_err()
Hello!
On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 07:12:58PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> I see socket is locked around line 368,
>
> bh_lock_sock(sk);
> /* If too many ICMPs get dropped on busy
> * servers this needs to be solved differently.
> */
> if (sock_owned_by_user(sk))
> NET_INC_STATS_BH(net, LINUX_MIB_LOCKDROPPEDICMPS);
>
>
> Hmm, maybe some goto is missing ;)
It is not missing, sock_owned_by_user() is checked later when some operation which
cannot be done without lock is required. It was done to save error in sk_err_soft even
when socket is locked.
This code also _understands_ this: look at
} else if (sock_owned_by_user(sk)) {
/* RTO revert clocked out retransmission,
* but socket is locked. Will defer. */
inet_csk_reset_xmit_timer(sk, ICSK_TIME_RETRANS,
HZ/20, TCP_RTO_MAX);
but somehow it considers the manipulations with rto/backoff/write_queue as safe.
Seems, they are not.
Alexey
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists