Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756753AbYKUPvK (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:51:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753883AbYKUPux (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:50:53 -0500 Received: from styx.suse.cz ([82.119.242.94]:52065 "EHLO mail.suse.cz" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752626AbYKUPuw convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:50:52 -0500 From: Petr Tesarik Organization: SUSE LINUX, s.r.o. To: "Ilpo =?utf-8?q?J=C3=A4rvinen?=" Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: fix potential corner case issue in segmentation (Was: Re: [PATCH] Do not use TSO/GSO when there is urgent data) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2008 16:51:51 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 20070904.708012) Cc: Netdev , LKML , "David S. Miller" , "Jan =?utf-8?q?=C5=A0embera?=" References: <200811211319.45515.ptesarik@suse.cz> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200811211651.52024.ptesarik@suse.cz> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3598 Lines: 85 Dne Friday 21 of November 2008 14:07:32 Ilpo Järvinen napsal(a): > On Fri, 21 Nov 2008, Petr Tesarik wrote: > > This patch fixes http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12014 > > > > Since most (if not all) implementations of TSO and even the in-kernel > > software GSO do not update the urgent pointer when splitting a large > > segment, it is necessary to turn off TSO/GSO for all outgoing traffic > > with the URG pointer set. > > Good observation, I totally missed this possibility of T/GSO while > looking. > > > Looking at tcp_current_mss (and the preceding comment) I even think > > this was the original intention. However, this approach is insufficient, > > because TSO/GSO is turned off only for newly created frames, not for > > frames which were already pending at the arrival of a message with > > MSG_OOB set. These frames were created when TSO/GSO was enabled, > > so they may be large, and they will have the urgent pointer set > > in tcp_transmit_skb(). > > > > With this patch, such large packets will be fragmented again before > > going to the transmit routine. > > I wonder if there's some corner case which still fails to fragment > in tcp_retransmit_xmit's in skb->len <= cur_mss case if cur_mss > grew very recently (and therefore skb-len now fits to a single segment). This shouldn't be a problem, because TSO only applies to packets which are larger than MSS, so the problematic case is when cur_mss gets smaller, not when it grows. In other words, the original implementation of tcp_retransmit_xmit() could never make use of TSO/GSO, anyway... >[...] > > Signed-off-by: Petr Tesarik > > CC: Jan Sembera > > CC: Ilpo Jarvinen > > > > -- > > tcp_output.c | 7 +++++-- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c > > --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c > > +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_output.c > > @@ -722,7 +722,8 @@ static void tcp_queue_skb(struct sock *sk, struct > > sk_buff *skb) > > static void tcp_set_skb_tso_segs(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb, > > unsigned int mss_now) > > { > > - if (skb->len <= mss_now || !sk_can_gso(sk)) { > > + if (skb->len <= mss_now || !sk_can_gso(sk) || > > + tcp_urg_mode(tcp_sk(sk))) { > > /* Avoid the costly divide in the normal > > * non-TSO case. > > */ > > @@ -1163,7 +1164,9 @@ static int tcp_init_tso_segs(struct sock *sk, > > struct sk_buff *skb, > > { > > int tso_segs = tcp_skb_pcount(skb); > > > > - if (!tso_segs || (tso_segs > 1 && tcp_skb_mss(skb) != mss_now)) { > > + if (!tso_segs || > > + (tso_segs > 1 && (tcp_skb_mss(skb) != mss_now || > > + tcp_urg_mode(tcp_sk(sk))))) { > > tcp_set_skb_tso_segs(sk, skb, mss_now); > > tso_segs = tcp_skb_pcount(skb); > > } > > It's a bit intrusive but I couldn't immediately come up with alternative > that would have worked (came up with some not working ones :-)). Yes, I also noticed that. We could add some more code to tcp_mark_urg(), e.g. walk sk_write_queue and adjust the pending SKBs there... Is it OK to simply set all skb->gso_segs to zero, and let the next call to tcp_init_tso_segs redo them? I mean, will tcp_init_tso_segs() be always called on all SKBs which are in the write queue at the time tcp_mark_urg() is called? Petr -- 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/