lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 10:40:29 -0400 From: Ido Yariv <ido@...ery.com> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>, James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>, Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>, Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@...gle.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ido Yariv <idox.yariv@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: tcp: Fix a PTO timing granularity issue Hi Eric, On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 06:41:17AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Wed, 2015-05-27 at 11:36 +0000, David Laight wrote: > > From: Of Ido Yariv > > > Sent: 26 May 2015 21:17 > > > The Tail Loss Probe RFC specifies that the PTO value should be set to > > > max(2 * SRTT, 10ms), where SRTT is the smoothed round-trip time. > > > > > > The PTO value is converted to jiffies, so the timer may expire > > > prematurely. > > > > > > This is especially problematic on systems in which HZ <= 100, so work > > > around this by setting the timeout to at least 2 jiffies on such > > > systems. > > > > > > The 10ms figure was originally selected based on tests performed with > > > the current implementation and HZ = 1000. Thus, leave the behavior on > > > systems with HZ > 100 unchanged. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ido Yariv <idox.yariv@...el.com> > > > --- > > > net/ipv4/tcp_output.c | 3 +++ > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c > > > index 534e5fd..5321df8 100644 > > > --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c > > > +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c > > > @@ -2208,6 +2208,9 @@ bool tcp_schedule_loss_probe(struct sock *sk) > > > timeout = max_t(u32, timeout, > > > (rtt + (rtt >> 1) + TCP_DELACK_MAX)); > > > timeout = max_t(u32, timeout, msecs_to_jiffies(10)); > > > +#if HZ <= 100 > > > + timeout = max_t(u32, timeout, 2); > > > +#endif > > > > Why not: > > timeout = max_t(u32, timeout, max_t(u32, 2, msecs_to_jiffies(10))); > > I think the RH max_t() is a compile time constant. > > > > You need 2 jiffies to guarantee a non-zero timeout. > > Even if HZ=199 with a 'rounding down' msecs_to_jiffies() you get 1 jiffy > > and a possible immediate timeout. > > > > Have you followed previous discussions ? > > I guess we can have a helper macro, but for the moment only one spot was > found. > > Its kind of depressing having to deal with HZ=100 issues, with modern > NO_HZ configurations. > > TCP rtts have now usec resolution, so HZ=100 is pushing TCP to very > imprecise behavior. HZ=100 is used on some embedded platforms, so it's still something we have to deal with unfortunately.. Since the '2' here is a lower bound, and msecs_to_jiffies(10) will return values greater than 2 for HZ>100 anyway, always ensuring the 2 jiffies lower bound shouldn't impact the behavior when HZ=1000. However, as far as I can tell, comparing msecs_to_jiffies(10) to 2, or comparing the whole timeout to 2 doesn't make much difference, since msecs_to_jiffies isn't inlined. In other words, keeping the #if shouldn't make much difference in behavior, but will save the small comparison. Cheers, Ido. -- 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