netdev - [PATCH net-next v4 4/4] net: tcp: refactor the dbg message in tcp_retransmit

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: <20230811025530.3510703-5-imagedong@tencent.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 10:55:30 +0800
From: menglong8.dong@...il.com
To: edumazet@...gle.com,
	ncardwell@...gle.com
Cc: davem@...emloft.net,
	kuba@...nel.org,
	pabeni@...hat.com,
	dsahern@...nel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	flyingpeng@...cent.com,
	Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
Subject: [PATCH net-next v4 4/4] net: tcp: refactor the dbg message in tcp_retransmit_timer()

From: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>

The debug message in tcp_retransmit_timer() is slightly wrong, because
they could be printed even if we did not receive a new ACK packet from
the remote peer.

Change it to probing zero-window, as it is a expected case now. The
description may be not correct.

Adding the duration since the last ACK we received, and the duration of
the retransmission, which are useful for debugging.

And the message now like this:

Probing zero-window on 127.0.0.1:9999/46946, seq=3737778959:3737791503, recv 209ms ago, lasting 209ms
Probing zero-window on 127.0.0.1:9999/46946, seq=3737778959:3737791503, recv 404ms ago, lasting 408ms
Probing zero-window on 127.0.0.1:9999/46946, seq=3737778959:3737791503, recv 812ms ago, lasting 1224ms

Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
---
 net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c | 23 +++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c
index f2a52c11e044..74c70fc1003c 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_timer.c
@@ -519,20 +519,23 @@ void tcp_retransmit_timer(struct sock *sk)
 		 * we cannot allow such beasts to hang infinitely.
 		 */
 		struct inet_sock *inet = inet_sk(sk);
+		u32 rtx_delta;
+
+		rtx_delta = tcp_time_stamp(tp) - (tp->retrans_stamp ?: tcp_skb_timestamp(skb));
 		if (sk->sk_family == AF_INET) {
-			net_dbg_ratelimited("Peer %pI4:%u/%u unexpectedly shrunk window %u:%u (repaired)\n",
-					    &inet->inet_daddr,
-					    ntohs(inet->inet_dport),
-					    inet->inet_num,
-					    tp->snd_una, tp->snd_nxt);
+			net_dbg_ratelimited("Probing zero-window on %pI4:%u/%u, seq=%u:%u, recv %ums ago, lasting %ums\n",
+				&inet->inet_daddr, ntohs(inet->inet_dport),
+				inet->inet_num, tp->snd_una, tp->snd_nxt,
+				jiffies_to_msecs(jiffies - tp->rcv_tstamp),
+				rtx_delta);
 		}
 #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6)
 		else if (sk->sk_family == AF_INET6) {
-			net_dbg_ratelimited("Peer %pI6:%u/%u unexpectedly shrunk window %u:%u (repaired)\n",
-					    &sk->sk_v6_daddr,
-					    ntohs(inet->inet_dport),
-					    inet->inet_num,
-					    tp->snd_una, tp->snd_nxt);
+			net_dbg_ratelimited("Probing zero-window on %pI6:%u/%u, seq=%u:%u, recv %ums ago, lasting %ums\n",
+				&sk->sk_v6_daddr, ntohs(inet->inet_dport),
+				inet->inet_num, tp->snd_una, tp->snd_nxt,
+				jiffies_to_msecs(jiffies - tp->rcv_tstamp),
+				rtx_delta);
 		}
 #endif
 		if (tcp_rtx_probe0_timed_out(sk, skb)) {
-- 
2.40.1