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;
prev parent 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