MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20190220145650.21566-1-olga.kornievskaia@gmail.com>
 <1550837576.6456.3.camel@redhat.com> <a124c78ca5a5eefce34e8a84e92d87516345ee0c.camel@hammerspace.com>
In-Reply-To: <a124c78ca5a5eefce34e8a84e92d87516345ee0c.camel@hammerspace.com>
From:   Olga Kornievskaia <olga.kornievskaia@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:46:57 -0500
Message-ID: <CAN-5tyE5dm07V_8Qqse5qrLQVzrYXELM1EY2ySpCedBUBKYsLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] SUNRPC: fix handling of half-closed connection
To:     Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com>
Cc:     "anna.schumaker@netapp.com" <anna.schumaker@netapp.com>,
        "dwysocha@redhat.com" <dwysocha@redhat.com>,
        "linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org" <linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 8:45 AM Trond Myklebust <trondmy@hammerspace.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2019-02-22 at 07:12 -0500, Dave Wysochanski wrote:
> > Hi Olga,
> >
> > Do you have a reproducer for this?  A number of months ago I did a
> > significant amount of testing with half-closed connections, after we
> > had reports of connections stuck in FIN_WAIT2 in some older kernels.
> > What I found was with kernels that had the tcp keepalives (commit
> > 7f260e8575bf53b93b77978c1e39f8e67612759c), I could only reproduce a
> > hang of a few minutes, after which time the tcp keepalive code would
> > reset the connection.
> >
> > That said it was a while ago and something subtle may have changed.
> > Also I'm not not sure if your header implies an indefinite hang or
> > just
> > a few minutes.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2019-02-20 at 09:56 -0500, Olga Kornievskaia wrote:
> > > From: Olga Kornievskaia <kolga@netapp.com>
> > >
> > > When server replies with an ACK to client's FIN/ACK, client ends
> > > up stuck in a TCP_FIN_WAIT2 state and client's mount hangs.
> > > Instead, make sure to close and reset client's socket and transport
> > > when transitioned into that state.
>

Hi Trond,

> So, please do note that we do not want to ignore the FIN_WAIT2 state

But we do ignore the FIN_WAIT2 state.

> because it implies that the server has not closed the socket on its
> side.

That's correct.

> That again means that we cannot re-establish a connection using
> the same source IP+port to the server, which is problematic for
> protocols such as NFSv3 which rely on standard duplicate reply cache
> for correct replay semantics.

that's exactly what's happening that a client is unable to establish a
new connection to the server. With the patch, the client does an RST
and it re-uses the port and all is well for NFSv3.

> This is why we don't just set the TCP_LINGER2 socket option and call
> sock_release(). The choice to try to wait it out is deliberate because
> the alternative is that we end up with busy-waiting re-connection
> attempts.

Why would it busy-wait? In my testing, RST happens and new connection
is established?


>
> Cheers
>   Trond
> --
> Trond Myklebust
> Linux NFS client maintainer, Hammerspace
> trond.myklebust@hammerspace.com
>
>