netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: Revert no longer abort SYN

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: <CANn89iLd6EeC3b8DTXBP=cDw8ri+k_uGiCrAS6BOoG3FMuAxmg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 11:03:55 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Shachar Kagan <skagan@...dia.com>, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>, 
	"Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" <regressions@...mhuis.info>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: Revert no longer abort SYN_SENT when
 receiving some ICMP

On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 10:58 AM Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 10:46:13AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 10:01 AM Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Shachar Kagan <skagan@...dia.com>
> > >
> > > This reverts commit 0a8de364ff7a14558e9676f424283148110384d6.
> > >
> > > Shachar reported that Vagrant (https://www.vagrantup.com/), which is
> > > very popular tool to manage fleet of VMs stopped to work after commit
> > > citied in Fixes line.
> > >
> > > The issue appears while using Vagrant to manage nested VMs.
> > > The steps are:
> > > * create vagrant file
> > > * vagrant up
> > > * vagrant halt (VM is created but shut down)
> > > * vagrant up - fail
> > >
> >
> > I would rather have an explanation, instead of reverting a valid patch.
> >
> > I have been on vacation for some time. I may have missed a detailed
> > explanation, please repost if needed.
>
> Our detailed explanation that revert worked. You provided the patch that
> broke, so please let's not require from users to debug it.
>
> If you need a help to reproduce and/or test some hypothesis, Shachar
> will be happy to help you, just ask.

I have asked already, and received files that showed no ICMP relevant
interactions.

Can someone from your team help Shachar to get  a packet capture of
both TCP _and_ ICMP packets ?

Otherwise there is little I can do. I can not blindly trust someone
that a valid patch broke something, just because 'something broke'