Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1760114AbYFMLJs (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:09:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754897AbYFMLJg (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:09:36 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:36333 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754736AbYFMLJe (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:09:34 -0400 Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:09:13 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: David Miller Cc: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, vgusev@openvz.org, mcmanus@ducksong.com, xemul@openvz.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [TCP]: TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT causes leak sockets Message-ID: <20080613110913.GB9867@elte.hu> References: <20080611.165255.242691774.davem@davemloft.net> <20080612.163212.148965080.davem@davemloft.net> <20080613063037.GA16943@elte.hu> <20080613.023208.78649628.davem@davemloft.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080613.023208.78649628.davem@davemloft.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1972 Lines: 56 * David Miller wrote: > From: Ingo Molnar > Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 08:30:37 +0200 > > > the 3 reverts have been extensively tested in -tip via: > > > > # tip/out-of-tree: 9e5b6ca: tcp: revert DEFER_ACCEPT modifications > > > > and the distcc problems are fixed. (The locking fix alone did not fix it > > conclusively in my testing, possibly due to the follow-on observations > > outlined in your description.) > > > > Tested-by: Ingo Molnar > > I didn't revert all three changes, just the final part of that 3 part > series. > > Please test the patch I actually applied. i just updated all my testsystems to revert the change i tested so far, and updated it to yours. The delta between the two is the 3 lines patch below. A few testsystems already booted into your patch, so if i dont report a hung TCP connection in the next 6 hours consider it: Tested-by: Ingo Molnar Ingo ---------------> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c b/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c index ec83448..045e799 100644 --- a/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c +++ b/net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c @@ -466,9 +466,9 @@ void inet_csk_reqsk_queue_prune(struct sock *parent, reqp=&lopt->syn_table[i]; while ((req = *reqp) != NULL) { if (time_after_eq(now, req->expires)) { - if ((req->retrans < thresh || - (inet_rsk(req)->acked && req->retrans < max_retries)) - && !req->rsk_ops->rtx_syn_ack(parent, req)) { + if ((req->retrans < (inet_rsk(req)->acked ? max_retries : thresh)) && + (inet_rsk(req)->acked || + !req->rsk_ops->rtx_syn_ack(parent, req))) { unsigned long timeo; if (req->retrans++ == 0) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/