netdev - Re: Spurious TCP retransmissions on ack vs kfree

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: <CANn89iJwfXFKnSAQpwaBnfrrE01PXyxLUieBxaB0RzyOajCzLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 26 Feb 2021 11:05:37 +0100
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Soheil Hassas Yeganeh <soheil@...gle.com>,
        Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: Spurious TCP retransmissions on ack vs kfree_skb reordering

On Fri, Feb 26, 2021 at 4:15 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 15:25:15 -0800 Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > We see large (4-8x) increase of what looks like TCP RTOs after rising
> > the Tx coalescing above Rx coalescing timeout.
> >
> > Quick tracing of the events seems to indicate that the data has already
> > been acked when we enter tcp:tcp_retransmit_skb:
>
> Seems like I'm pretty lost here and the tcp:tcp_retransmit_skb events
> are less spurious than I thought. Looking at some tcpdump traces we see:
>
> 0.045277 IP6 A > B: Flags [SEW], seq 2248382925:2248383296, win 61920, options [mss 1440,sackOK,TS val 658870494 ecr 0,nop,wscale 11], length 371
>
> 0.045348 IP6 B > A: Flags [S.E], seq 961169456, ack 2248382926, win 65535, options [mss 1440,sackOK,TS val 883864022 ecr 658870494,nop,wscale 9], length 0

The SYNACK does not include the prior payload.

> 0.045369 IP6 A > B: Flags [P.], seq 1:372, ack 1, win 31, options [nop,nop,TS val 658870494 ecr 883864022], length 371

So this rtx is not spurious.

However in your prior email you wrote :

bytes_in:      0
bytes_out:   742
bytes_acked: 742

Are you sure that at the time of the retransmit, bytes_acked was 742 ?
I do not see how this could happen.

>
>
> So looks potentially TFO related?
>
> To try to count timeouts I run:
>
> bpftrace --btf -e 'tracepoint:tcp:tcp_retransmit_skb {
>   $icsk = (struct inet_connection_sock *)args->skaddr;
>   if ($icsk->icsk_ca_state != 4) { return; }
>   if ($icsk->icsk_pending)       { return; }
>
>   printf(...);
> }'
>
> At tx-usecs coalescing of 25us I see 0 of those events.
> At 100us there is a few.
> At 200us there is a lot.