Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756253AbdIRRog (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:44:36 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:43650 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755355AbdIRRod (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:44:33 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 8E80F81DF5 Authentication-Results: ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: ext-mx01.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=crobinso@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] fix reuseaddr regression To: josef@toxicpanda.com, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, labbott@redhat.com, kernel-team@fb.com References: <1505752137-15522-1-git-send-email-jbacik@fb.com> From: Cole Robinson Message-ID: <5df48cbb-2726-3e99-84e7-eb6c6fc0dbb2@redhat.com> Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2017 13:44:32 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1505752137-15522-1-git-send-email-jbacik@fb.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.25]); Mon, 18 Sep 2017 17:44:33 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 832 Lines: 18 On 09/18/2017 12:28 PM, josef@toxicpanda.com wrote: > I introduced a regression when reworking the fastreuse port stuff that allows > bind conflicts to occur once a reuseaddr socket successfully opens on an > existing tb. The root cause is I reversed an if statement which caused us to > set the tb as if there were no owners on the socket if there were, which > obviously is not correct. > > Dave I have follow up patches that will add a selftest for this case and I ran > the other reuseport related tests as well. These need to go in pretty quickly > as it breaks kvm, I've marked them for stable. Sorry for the regression, > To clarify, it doesn't really break KVM specifically, but it breaks a port collision detection idiom that libvirt depends on to successfully launch qemu/xen/... VMs in certain cases. Thanks, Cole