netdev - Re: TCP many-connection regression (bisected to 4.5.0-rc2+)

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: <1516745230.3715.10.camel@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 23 Jan 2018 14:07:10 -0800
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: TCP many-connection regression (bisected to 4.5.0-rc2+)

On Tue, 2018-01-23 at 13:49 -0800, Ben Greear wrote:
> On 01/22/2018 10:16 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 09:28 -0800, Ben Greear wrote:
> > > My test case is to have 6 processes each create 5000 TCP IPv4 connections to each other
> > > on a system with 16GB RAM and send slow-speed data.  This works fine on a 4.7 kernel, but
> > > will not work at all on a 4.13.  The 4.13 first complains about running out of tcp memory,
> > > but even after forcing those values higher, the max connections we can get is around 15k.
> > > 
> > > Both kernels have my out-of-tree patches applied, so it is possible it is my fault
> > > at this point.
> > > 
> > > Any suggestions as to what this might be caused by, or if it is fixed in more recent kernels?
> > > 
> > > I will start bisecting in the meantime...
> > > 
> > 
> > Hi Ben
> > 
> > Unfortunately I have no idea.
> > 
> > Are you using loopback flows, or have I misunderstood you ?
> > 
> > How loopback connections can be slow-speed ?
> > 
> 
> Hello Eric, looks like it is one of your commits that causes the issue
> I see.
> 
> Here are some more details on my specific test case I used to bisect:
> 
> I have two ixgbe ports looped back, configured on same subnet, but with different IPs.
> Routing table rules, SO_BINDTODEVICE, binding to specific IPs on both client and server
> side let me send-to-self over the external looped cable.
> 
> I have 2 mac-vlans on each physical interface.
> 
> I created 5 server-side connections on one physical port, and two more on one of the mac-vlans.
> 
> On the client-side, I create a process that spawns 5000 connections to the corresponding server side.
> 
> End result is 25,000 connections on one pair of real interfaces, and 10,000 connections on the
> mac-vlan ports.
> 
> In the passing case, I get very close to all 5000 connections on all endpoints quickly.
> 
> In the failing case, I get a max of around 16k connections on the two physical ports.  The two mac-vlans have 10k connections
> across them working reliably.  It seems to be an issue with 'connect' failing.
> 
> connect(2074, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(33012), sin_addr=inet_addr("10.1.1.5")}, 16) = -1 EINPROGRESS (Operation now in progress)
> socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_IP) = 2075
> fcntl(2075, F_GETFD)                    = 0
> fcntl(2075, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC)        = 0
> setsockopt(2075, SOL_SOCKET, SO_BINDTODEVICE, "eth4\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0", 16) = 0
> setsockopt(2075, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, [1], 4) = 0
> bind(2075, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(0), sin_addr=inet_addr("10.1.1.4")}, 16) = 0
> getsockopt(2075, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [87380], [4]) = 0
> getsockopt(2075, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [16384], [4]) = 0
> setsockopt(2075, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, [0], 4) = 0
> fcntl(2075, F_GETFL)                    = 0x2 (flags O_RDWR)
> fcntl(2075, F_SETFL, O_ACCMODE|O_NONBLOCK) = 0
> connect(2075, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(33012), sin_addr=inet_addr("10.1.1.5")}, 16) = -1 EINPROGRESS (Operation now in progress)
> socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_IP) = 2076
> fcntl(2076, F_GETFD)                    = 0
> fcntl(2076, F_SETFD, FD_CLOEXEC)        = 0
> setsockopt(2076, SOL_SOCKET, SO_BINDTODEVICE, "eth4\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0", 16) = 0
> setsockopt(2076, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, [1], 4) = 0
> bind(2076, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(0), sin_addr=inet_addr("10.1.1.4")}, 16) = 0
> getsockopt(2076, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVBUF, [87380], [4]) = 0
> getsockopt(2076, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, [16384], [4]) = 0
> setsockopt(2076, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, [0], 4) = 0
> fcntl(2076, F_GETFL)                    = 0x2 (flags O_RDWR)
> fcntl(2076, F_SETFL, O_ACCMODE|O_NONBLOCK) = 0
> connect(2076, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(33012), sin_addr=inet_addr("10.1.1.5")}, 16) = -1 EADDRNOTAVAIL (Cannot assign requested address)
> ....
> 
> 
> ea8add2b190395408b22a9127bed2c0912aecbc8 is the first bad commit
> commit ea8add2b190395408b22a9127bed2c0912aecbc8
> Author: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> Date:   Thu Feb 11 16:28:50 2016 -0800
> 
>      tcp/dccp: better use of ephemeral ports in bind()
> 
>      Implement strategy used in __inet_hash_connect() in opposite way :
> 
>      Try to find a candidate using odd ports, then fallback to even ports.
> 
>      We no longer disable BH for whole traversal, but one bucket at a time.
>      We also use cond_resched() to yield cpu to other tasks if needed.
> 
>      I removed one indentation level and tried to mirror the loop we have
>      in __inet_hash_connect() and variable names to ease code maintenance.
> 
>      Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>      Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
> 
> :040000 040000 3af4595c6eb6d331e1cba78a142d44e00f710d81 e0c014ae8b7e2867256eff60f6210821d36eacef M	net
> 
> 
> I will be happy to test patches or try to get any other results that might help diagnose
> this problem better.

Problem is I do not see anything obvious here.

Please provide /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_local_port_range

Also you probably could use IP_BIND_ADDRESS_NO_PORT socket option
before the bind()