public inbox for linux-s390@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "D. Wythe" <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>
To: Wen Gu <guwen@linux.alibaba.com>,
	kgraul@linux.ibm.com, wenjia@linux.ibm.com, jaka@linux.ibm.com,
	wintera@linux.ibm.com
Cc: kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org,
	tonylu@linux.alibaba.com, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3] net/smc: avoid data corruption caused by decline
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2023 17:55:20 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ccf3e279-b9d2-5bd1-b033-8071471720e0@linux.alibaba.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2322494c-15c1-8f08-7856-5c965daa12ae@linux.alibaba.com>



On 11/20/23 11:37 AM, Wen Gu wrote:
>
>
> On 2023/11/19 23:28, D. Wythe wrote:
>> From: "D. Wythe" <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>
>>
>> We found a data corruption issue during testing of SMC-R on Redis
>> applications.
>>
>> The benchmark has a low probability of reporting a strange error as
>> shown below.
>>
>> "Error: Protocol error, got "\xe2" as reply type byte"
>>
>> Finally, we found that the retrieved error data was as follows:
>>
>> 0xE2 0xD4 0xC3 0xD9 0x04 0x00 0x2C 0x20 0xA6 0x56 0x00 0x16 0x3E 0x0C
>> 0xCB 0x04 0x02 0x01 0x00 0x00 0x20 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00
>> 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0x00 0xE2
>>
>> It is quite obvious that this is a SMC DECLINE message, which means that
>> the applications received SMC protocol message.
>> We found that this was caused by the following situations:
>>
>> client                  server
>>          ¦  proposal
>>          ------------->
>>          ¦  accept
>>          <-------------
>>          ¦  confirm
>>          ------------->
>> wait confirm
>
> I think there may be an ambiguity here, better for 'wait for llc 
> confirm link'.
> Could you please add 'clc' and 'llc' prefix to distinguish flows on 
> the diagram?
>

Looks Reasonable. I'll make changes in the next revision.

D. Wythe

> Thanks.
>
>>
>>          ¦failed llc confirm
>>          ¦   x------
>> (after 2s)timeout
>>                          wait rsp
>>
>> wait decline
>>
>> (after 1s) timeout
>>                          (after 2s) timeout
>>          ¦   decline
>>          -------------->
>>          ¦   decline
>>          <--------------
>>
>> As a result, a decline message was sent in the implementation, and this
>> message was read from TCP by the already-fallback connection.
>>
>> This patch double the client timeout as 2x of the server value,
>> With this simple change, the Decline messages should never cross or
>> collide (during Confirm link timeout).
>>
>> This issue requires an immediate solution, since the protocol updates
>> involve a more long-term solution.
>>
>> Fixes: 0fb0b02bd6fd ("net/smc: adapt SMC client code to use the LLC 
>> flow")
>> Signed-off-by: D. Wythe <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>
>
>
>> ---
>>   net/smc/af_smc.c | 8 ++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c
>> index abd2667..8615cc0 100644
>> --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c
>> +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c
>> @@ -598,8 +598,12 @@ static int smcr_clnt_conf_first_link(struct 
>> smc_sock *smc)
>>       struct smc_llc_qentry *qentry;
>>       int rc;
>>   -    /* receive CONFIRM LINK request from server over RoCE fabric */
>> -    qentry = smc_llc_wait(link->lgr, NULL, SMC_LLC_WAIT_TIME,
>> +    /* Receive CONFIRM LINK request from server over RoCE fabric.
>> +     * Increasing the client's timeout by twice as much as the server's
>> +     * timeout by default can temporarily avoid decline messages of
>> +     * both sides crossing or colliding
>> +     */
>> +    qentry = smc_llc_wait(link->lgr, NULL, 2 * SMC_LLC_WAIT_TIME,
>>                     SMC_LLC_CONFIRM_LINK);
>>       if (!qentry) {
>>           struct smc_clc_msg_decline dclc;


      reply	other threads:[~2023-11-20  9:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-11-19 15:28 [PATCH net v3] net/smc: avoid data corruption caused by decline D. Wythe
2023-11-20  3:37 ` Wen Gu
2023-11-20  9:55   ` D. Wythe [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=ccf3e279-b9d2-5bd1-b033-8071471720e0@linux.alibaba.com \
    --to=alibuda@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=guwen@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=jaka@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kgraul@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=tonylu@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=wenjia@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=wintera@linux.ibm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox