netdev - Re: scp stalls mysteriously

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.0912031430170.7024@wel-95.cs.helsinki.fi>
Date:	Thu, 3 Dec 2009 14:44:04 +0200 (EET)
From:	"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
To:	Frederic Leroy <fredo@...rox.org>
cc:	Damian Lukowski <damian@....rwth-aachen.de>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
	Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: scp stalls mysteriously

On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Frederic Leroy wrote:

> Le Thu, 3 Dec 2009 12:29:39 +0200 (EET),
> "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi> a écrit :
> 
> > Opinions, Dave?, Greg?
> > 
> > Now back to the issue...
> > 
> > You said in the other mail that "All further test are on linus-stable 
> > tree.", which has this contradiction that Linus does not maintain
> > stable trees. Which exactly was the tree used for the .9. test
> 
> Sorry I'm confused and so confuse you.
> For .9 .10 and now I'm only using : 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git

Thanks for the confirmation.

> > Nice thinking indeed Damian, thanks. ...But but, where exactly did
> > you print? ...There are multiple returns and the return false branch
> > is expected to have a zero retrans_stamp in a typical case but that
> > is not a problem because we never use the value.
> 
> Here is the code :
> http://www.starox.org/pub/scp_stall/printk_retrans_stamp.patch

So I was wrong.

> > Also, we have the another mystery to be solved, the fast
> > retransmission is not triggered for some reason (or alternatively not
> > captured in to a log), even in the working .9. case. It would be easy
> > to see whether it works at all from TCP point of view by looking into
> > mibs once you have have some transfers in a working configuration:
> > 
> > grep -A1 TCP /proc/net/netstat
> 
> I will try this evening. I can do test only outside office hours.

Ok. Please take before test and after test capture to allow easy 
compare of what changed.

-- 
 i.