[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <99d458640912021118y42a6fe4bm7b742a2046ad7a3b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2009 11:18:24 -0800
From: kapil dakhane <kdakhane@...il.com>
To: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
netfilter@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: Fix a connect() race with timewait sockets
Here's the list of tuning parameters used:
net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_intvl = 5
net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_probes = 3
net.ipv4.tcp_keepalive_time = 180
net.ipv4.tcp_fin_timeout = 10
net.ipv4.tcp_max_syn_backlog = 8192
net.ipv4.tcp_max_tw_buckets = 360000
net.ipv4.tcp_tw_reuse = 1
net.ipv4.tcp_tw_recycle = 1
net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies = 0
net.core.netdev_max_backlog = 5000
Kapil
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 3:32 AM, Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 11:33:55AM +0100, Eric Dumazet (eric.dumazet@...il.com) wrote:
>> You need several threads, using sockets with REUSEADDR set,
>> and bind() to same address/port before connect() to same target.
>>
>> We need another patch to correct this.
>>
>> I wonder if always hold lock before calling check_established()
>> would be cleaner.
>
> Isnt this a too big overhead?
>
> --
> Evgeniy Polyakov
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists