Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754925Ab1EKPp4 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2011 11:45:56 -0400 Received: from mail.vyatta.com ([76.74.103.46]:48481 "EHLO mail.vyatta.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754884Ab1EKPpw (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 May 2011 11:45:52 -0400 Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 08:22:38 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger To: TB Cc: "Brandeburg, Jesse" , David Miller , Sangtae Ha , Injong Rhee , "Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu" , "rdunlap@xenotime.net" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp_cubic: limit delayed_ack ratio to prevent divide error Message-ID: <20110511082238.1ef1c190@nehalam> In-Reply-To: <4DCAA1DD.6010609@techboom.com> References: <20110504113351.4643a0c9@nehalam> <16668.1304537481@localhost> <20110504123738.7bb4d1ee@nehalam> <20110504.124053.260068550.davem@davemloft.net> <20110504130456.425dee68@nehalam> <4DC41EB2.6070404@techboom.com> <20110506095359.57c4fb38@nehalam> <4DCAA1DD.6010609@techboom.com> Organization: Vyatta X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.6 (GTK+ 2.22.0; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 6045 Lines: 154 On Wed, 11 May 2011 10:49:01 -0400 TB wrote: > On 11-05-06 12:53 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > On Fri, 06 May 2011 12:15:46 -0400 > > TB wrote: > > > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> On 11-05-04 04:53 PM, Brandeburg, Jesse wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> On Wed, 4 May 2011, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > >>> > >>>> TCP Cubic keeps a metric that estimates the amount of delayed > >>>> acknowledgements to use in adjusting the window. If an abnormally > >>>> large number of packets are acknowledged at once, then the update > >>>> could wrap and reach zero. This kind of ACK could only > >>>> happen when there was a large window and huge number of > >>>> ACK's were lost. > >>>> > >>>> This patch limits the value of delayed ack ratio. The choice of 32 > >>>> is just a conservative value since normally it should be range of > >>>> 1 to 4 packets. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger > >>> > >>> patch seems fine, but please credit the reporter (lkml@techboom.com) with > >>> reporting the issue with logs, maybe even with Reported-by: and some kind > >>> of reference to the panic message or the email thread in the text or > >>> header? > >> > >> We're currently testing the patch on 6 production servers > > > > Thank you, is there some regularity to the failures previously? > > This is now being tested on about 50 servers and we just had another > panic, on a server with 2.6.38.5 and this patch. > > [405542.454073] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > [405542.454109] kernel BUG at net/ipv4/tcp_output.c:1006! > [405542.454136] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] > > [405542.454166] last sysfs file: > /sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1f.2/host6/scsi_host/host6/proc_name > [405542.454213] CPU 0 > > [405542.454220] Modules linked in: > i2c_i801 > evdev > i2c_core > button > [last unloaded: scsi_wait_scan] > > [405542.454300] > [405542.454320] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Not tainted 2.6.38.5 #8 > > / > > [405542.454379] RIP: 0010:[] > [] tcp_fragment+0x22/0x29a > [405542.454433] RSP: 0018:ffff8800bf403a30 EFLAGS: 00010202 > [405542.454460] RAX: ffff88000cd35000 RBX: ffff88006b84f480 RCX: > 0000000000000218 > [405542.454504] RDX: 0000000000001708 RSI: ffff88006b84f480 RDI: > ffff880008d6b200 > [405542.454548] RBP: 0000000000001540 R08: 0000000000000002 R09: > 000000001027984a > [405542.454592] R10: ffff8800b915f428 R11: ffff880008d6b200 R12: > ffff88006b84f4a8 > [405542.454636] R13: 0000000000001708 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: > ffff880008d6b200 > [405542.454680] FS: 0000000000000000(0000) GS:ffff8800bf400000(0000) > knlGS:0000000000000000 > [405542.454726] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 000000008005003b > [405542.454754] CR2: 00007f94055c7000 CR3: 000000083e0bd000 CR4: > 00000000000006f0 > [405542.454798] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: > 0000000000000000 > [405542.454842] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000ffff0ff0 DR7: > 0000000000000400 > [405542.454886] Process swapper (pid: 0, threadinfo ffffffff8176c000, > task ffffffff81777020) > [405542.454931] Stack: > [405542.454951] 0000000000000000 > 0000021808d6b798 > 00000002000005b4 > ffff88006b84f480 > > [405542.455006] ffff880008d6b200 > ffff88006b84f4a8 > 0000000000000015 > 0000000000000000 > > [405542.455061] ffff880008d6b300 > ffffffff814df7a4 > ffff8802a3965140 > 00000000000001a0 > > [405542.455115] Call Trace: > [405542.455137] > > [405542.455162] [] ? tcp_mark_head_lost+0x13c/0x202 > [405542.455192] [] ? tcp_ack+0xe98/0x1a89 > [405542.455220] [] ? tcp_validate_incoming+0x69/0x290 > [405542.455250] [] ? tcp_rcv_established+0x7aa/0xa13 > [405542.455281] [] ? tcp_v4_do_rcv+0x1b2/0x382 > [405542.455310] [] ? nf_iterate+0x40/0x78 > [405542.455338] [] ? tcp_v4_rcv+0x484/0x797 > [405542.455368] [] ? ip_local_deliver_finish+0xab/0x139 > [405542.455398] [] ? __netif_receive_skb+0x31c/0x349 > [405542.455428] [] ? netif_receive_skb+0x67/0x6d > [405542.455457] [] ? napi_gro_receive+0x9d/0xab > [405542.455485] [] ? napi_skb_finish+0x1c/0x31 > [405542.455516] [] ? igb_poll+0x7d5/0xb2e > [405542.455544] [] ? igb_poll+0x8bc/0xb2e > [405542.455572] [] ? igb_msix_ring+0x6e/0x75 > [405542.455602] [] ? handle_IRQ_event+0x51/0x119 > [405542.455631] [] ? net_rx_action+0xa7/0x212 > [405542.455661] [] ? __do_softirq+0xbe/0x184 > [405542.455690] [] ? call_softirq+0x1c/0x28 > [405542.455719] [] ? do_softirq+0x31/0x63 > [405542.455746] [] ? irq_exit+0x36/0x78 > [405542.455773] [] ? do_IRQ+0x98/0xae > [405542.455802] [] ? ret_from_intr+0x0/0xe > [405542.455829] > > [405542.455860] [] ? mwait_idle+0xb9/0xf3 > [405542.455888] [] ? cpu_idle+0x57/0x8d > [405542.455921] [] ? start_kernel+0x34e/0x35a > [405542.455950] [] ? x86_64_start_kernel+0xf3/0xf9 This panic is different than the last one. It is coming from TCP fragment code being called with an invalid skb. If I read the registers correctly, skb->len (R14) = 0 and len (EDX) = 1708; the check here is failing. int tcp_fragment(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb, u32 len, unsigned int mss_now) { BUG_ON(len > skb->len); Are you running with large (or small) MTU? What netfilter rules, perhaps the firewall rule altered the packet. -- -- 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/