[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50FF0C25.9000300@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2013 14:01:09 -0800
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To: Leandro Lucarella <leandro.lucarella@...iomantic.com>
CC: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Doubts about listen backlog and tcp_max_syn_backlog
On 01/22/2013 10:42 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:17:50AM -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
>>> What is important is the backlog, and I guess you didn't increase it
>>> properly. The somaxconn default is quite low (128)
>>
>> Leandro -
>>
>> If that is being overflowed, I believe you should be seeing something like:
>>
>> 14 SYNs to LISTEN sockets dropped
>>
>> in the output of netstat -s on the system on which the server
>> application is running.
>
> What is that value reporting exactly?
Netstat is reporting the ListenDrops and/or ListenOverflows which map
to LINUX_MIB_LISTENDROPS and LINUX_MIB_LISTENOVERFLOWS. Those get
incremented in tcp_v4_syn_recv_sock() (and its v6 version etc)
if (sk_acceptq_is_full(sk))
goto exit_overflow;
Will increment both overflows and drops, and drops will increment on its
own in some additional cases.
> Because we are using syncookies, and AFAIK with that enabled, all
> SYNs are being replied, and what the listen backlog is really
> limitting is the "completely established sockets waiting to be
> accepted", according to listen(2). What I don't really know to be
> honest, is what a "completely established socket" is, does it mean
> that the SYN,ACK was sent, or the ACK was received back?
I have always thought it meant that the ACK of the SYN|ACK has been
received.
SyncookiesSent SyncookiesRecv SyncookiesFailed also appear in
/proc/net/netstat and presumably in netstat -s output.
> Also, from the client side, when is the connect(2) call done? When the
> SYN,ACK is received?
That would be my assumption.
In a previous message:
> What I'm seeing are clients taking either useconds to connect, or 3
> seconds, which suggest SYNs are getting lost, but the network doesn't
> seem to be the problem. I'm still investigating this, so unfortunately
> I'm not really sure.
I recently ran into something like that, which turned-out to be an issue
with nf_conntrack and its table filling.
rick
--
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