netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2] tcp: avoid reducing cwnd when ACK+DSACK is received

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: <CADVnQy=kACmKGkakx85BHWg7WppS3-B1yLa-TXvfBKbXtXYJ+A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 8 Jan 2015 10:43:07 -0500
From:	Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>
To:	Sébastien Barré <sebastien.barre@...ouvain.be>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Gregory Detal <gregory.detal@...ouvain.be>,
	Nandita Dukkipati <nanditad@...gle.com>,
	Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] tcp: avoid reducing cwnd when ACK+DSACK is received

> Le 08/01/2015 16:07, Eric Dumazet a écrit :
>> Do you have at hand a packetdrill test to demonstrate that the patch
>> works ?

I cooked up the packetdrill test below when Sebastien sent out his v1
a few weeks ago. It fails on a kernel without his patch, and passes on
a kernel with his patch.

The code change looks fine to me, but if Eric prefers that the
expression be assigned to a bool before the check, that also sounds
fine to me.

neal


------------
// Establish a connection.
0     socket(..., SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP) = 3
+0     setsockopt(3, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, [1], 4) = 0
+0    bind(3, ..., ...) = 0
+0    listen(3, 1) = 0

+0    < S 0:0(0) win 32792 <mss 1000,sackOK,nop,nop,nop,wscale 7>
+0    > S. 0:0(0) ack 1 <mss 1460,nop,nop,sackOK,nop,wscale 6>
+.020 < . 1:1(0) ack 1 win 257
+0    accept(3, ..., ...) = 4

// Send 1 packet.
+0    write(4, ..., 1000) = 1000
+0    > P. 1:1001(1000) ack 1

// Loss probe retransmission.
// packets_out == 1 => schedule PTO in max(2*RTT, 1.5*RTT + 200ms)
// In this case, this means: 1.5*RTT + 200ms = 230ms
+.230 > P. 1:1001(1000) ack 1
+0    %{ assert tcpi_snd_cwnd == 10 }%

// Receiver ACKs at tlp_high_seq with a DSACK,
// indicating they received the original packet and probe.
+.020 < . 1:1(0) ack 1001 win 257 <sack 1:1001,nop,nop>
+0    %{ assert tcpi_snd_cwnd == 10 }%

// Send another packet.
+0    write(4, ..., 1000) = 1000
+0    > P. 1001:2001(1000) ack 1

// Receiver ACKs above tlp_high_seq, which should end the TLP episode
// if we haven't already. We should not reduce cwnd.
+.020 < . 1:1(0) ack 2001 win 257
+0    %{ assert tcpi_snd_cwnd == 10, tcpi_snd_cwnd }%
--
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