From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: jmaxwell37@gmail.com
Cc: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
jmaxwell@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] tcp: Add mark for TIMEWAIT sockets
Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 17:45:20 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180510.174520.128087783939744310.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180510065351.22535-1-jmaxwell37@gmail.com>
From: Jon Maxwell <jmaxwell37@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 10 May 2018 16:53:51 +1000
> This version has some suggestions by Eric Dumazet:
>
> - Use a local variable for the mark in IPv6 instead of ctl_sk to avoid SMP
> races.
> - Use the more elegant "IP4_REPLY_MARK(net, skb->mark) ?: sk->sk_mark"
> statement.
> - Factorize code as sk_fullsock() check is not necessary.
>
> Aidan McGurn from Openwave Mobility systems reported the following bug:
>
> "Marked routing is broken on customer deployment. Its effects are large
> increase in Uplink retransmissions caused by the client never receiving
> the final ACK to their FINACK - this ACK misses the mark and routes out
> of the incorrect route."
>
> Currently marks are added to sk_buffs for replies when the "fwmark_reflect"
> sysctl is enabled. But not for TW sockets that had sk->sk_mark set via
> setsockopt(SO_MARK..).
>
> Fix this in IPv4/v6 by adding tw->tw_mark for TIME_WAIT sockets. Copy the the
> original sk->sk_mark in __inet_twsk_hashdance() to the new tw->tw_mark location.
> Then progate this so that the skb gets sent with the correct mark. Do the same
> for resets. Give the "fwmark_reflect" sysctl precedence over sk->sk_mark so that
> netfilter rules are still honored.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jon Maxwell <jmaxwell37@gmail.com>
I'm surprised the lack of a mark in timewait sockets wasn't noticed earlier.
Applied, thank you.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-10 21:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-10 6:53 [PATCH net-next v2] tcp: Add mark for TIMEWAIT sockets Jon Maxwell
2018-05-10 13:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2018-05-10 21:45 ` David Miller [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=20180510.174520.128087783939744310.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=jmaxwell37@gmail.com \
--cc=jmaxwell@redhat.com \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).