From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63ED21A734 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2024 22:02:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="FryaLKuk" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2630AC433C8; Tue, 2 Jan 2024 22:02:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1704232954; bh=EbY85eJKonMkWrOzkVQ2y8+vEbfHIAu/nyHcd2U0JRY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=FryaLKukFnVbvH9IPMCsQeLqI1JszQ77PNBhLol2J4mmXly9+ZUf0tVsP1A4IbWGX jIo9xkOxfG3FEvwIkznI4bdcpElOnsRQEgoeqjwivkh7+RobvNXy4g9WppnvwiZOfn RW083IR+0jVL2lKzGZdxos+y/4PL/LBvd+2cpqI1q66r23Pg7jO+h57LVzkvjgCeaL njTGsisPowZCMjJWS4dMVI1VfIbc0cIA46YYIJmzcTu9vKYS0LtZpS0X2Oaavrv5Bl MBn0UmIGDB3IS/LLZsqvoheo4DyET1VTK/7zGd568dVDGzph54Rz7kCf04WjS3B61M EbcgRKGlMYayg== Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 14:02:32 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Leon Romanovsky Cc: Eric Dumazet , David Ahern , "David S. Miller" , Paolo Abeni , Shachar Kagan , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Bagas Sanjaya , "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)" Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: Revert no longer abort SYN_SENT when receiving some ICMP Message-ID: <20240102140232.77915fc3@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <14459261ea9f9c7d7dfb28eb004ce8734fa83ade.1704185904.git.leonro@nvidia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 2 Jan 2024 10:46:13 +0100 Eric Dumazet wrote: > > The issue appears while using Vagrant to manage nested VMs. > > The steps are: > > * create vagrant file > > * vagrant up > > * vagrant halt (VM is created but shut down) > > * vagrant up - fail > > I would rather have an explanation, instead of reverting a valid patch. +1 obviously. Your refusal to debug this any further does not put nVidia's TCP / NVMe offload in a good light. On one hand you claim to have TCP experts in house and are pushing TCP offloads and on the other you can't debug a TCP issue for which you reportedly have an easy repro? Does not add up.