From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C74C48BD5 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 00:56:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 590B8208CA for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 00:56:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561510592; bh=W0a6w7n3NwwgpMsIk3UGanvkzmcJbz3SR2PttPPYxhE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=ylxrDbilKKJBVxV4Pu5cYhvf+2jMOhZQn762VH8z7Uy4r12Ea8zbqUCSpjM+b4gpc ylxLT1vgSy3mL2faw70FerywxHBtRmcI40alLRBdXpO8BJjOKQCc6Up9ToVE6sq82N KC7ZkHw1i+cejSASupkRAMMNJo6wsKbeX/aZ4qLg= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726354AbfFZA4b (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jun 2019 20:56:31 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:32926 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726037AbfFZA4b (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Jun 2019 20:56:31 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [172.104.248.44]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 024322085A; Wed, 26 Jun 2019 00:56:28 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561510590; bh=W0a6w7n3NwwgpMsIk3UGanvkzmcJbz3SR2PttPPYxhE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=fo5AZxxBxmMijX0ZW5vTrWCO1gPYIKLOxC4s0Eq8Wlu978KtIqSvpST81oDbVo5Cl NlWzGtl7+TcsXbuICiiSmt+ZrfLqWLFw4Tl95S+vHZ5nSbMTC1oNCVH7w5XQHbtZc7 F+nENRpW1e4/sZWHknLghqGvy9Oqklu3EmsR8tu4= Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2019 08:48:46 +0800 From: Greg KH To: Josh Hunt Cc: Sasha Levin , edumazet@google.com, stable@vger.kernel.org, jbaron@akamai.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.14] tcp: refine memory limit test in tcp_fragment() Message-ID: <20190626004846.GA21530@kroah.com> References: <1561483177-30254-1-git-send-email-johunt@akamai.com> <20190625202626.GD7898@sasha-vm> <4c6d6697-b629-243c-824b-8080ee1e1635@akamai.com> <20190625221821.GA17994@kroah.com> <7282e627-edd6-51cb-ad9d-d9f34b2e9628@akamai.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7282e627-edd6-51cb-ad9d-d9f34b2e9628@akamai.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15) Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 03:49:33PM -0700, Josh Hunt wrote: > On 6/25/19 3:18 PM, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 01:29:35PM -0700, Josh Hunt wrote: > > > On 6/25/19 1:26 PM, Sasha Levin wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 01:19:37PM -0400, Josh Hunt wrote: > > > > > Backport of dad3a9314ac95dedc007bc7dacacb396ea10e376: > > > > > > > > You probably meant b6653b3629e5b88202be3c9abc44713973f5c4b4 here. > > > > > > I wasn't sure if I should reference the upstream commit or stable commit. > > > > The upstream commit please. > > Thanks. I'll fix for next version. > > > > > > dad3a9314 is the version of the commit from linux-4.14.y. There may be a > > > similar issue with the Fixes tag below since that also references the 4.14 > > > vers of the change. > > > > > > > > > > > > tcp_fragment() might be called for skbs in the write queue. > > > > > > > > > > Memory limits might have been exceeded because tcp_sendmsg() only > > > > > checks limits at full skb (64KB) boundaries. > > > > > > > > > > Therefore, we need to make sure tcp_fragment() wont punish applications > > > > > that might have setup very low SO_SNDBUF values. > > > > > > > > > > Backport notes: > > > > > Initial version used tcp_queue type which is not present in older > > > > > kernels, > > > > > so added a new arg to tcp_fragment() to determine whether this is a > > > > > retransmit or not. > > > > > > > > > > Fixes: 9daf226ff926 ("tcp: tcp_fragment() should apply sane memory > > > > > limits") > > > > > Signed-off-by: Josh Hunt > > > > > Reviewed-by: Jason Baron > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Eric/Greg - This applies on top of v4.14.130. I did not see anything come > > > > > through for the older (<4.19) stable kernels yet. Without this change > > > > > Christoph Paasch's packetrill script (https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/CALMXkpYVRxgeqarp4gnmX7GqYh1sWOAt6UaRFqYBOaaNFfZ5sw@mail.gmail.com/) > > > > > > > > > > will fail on 4.14 stable kernels, but passes with this change. > > > > > > > > Eric, it would be great if you could Ack this, it's very different from > > > > your original patch. > > > > > > Yes, that would be great. > > > > I would prefer if this looks a bit more like the upstream fix, perhaps a > > backport of the function that added the "direction" of the packet first, > > and then Eric's patch? As it is, this patch adds a different parameter > > to the function than what is in Linus's tree, and I bet will cause > > problems at some later point in time. > > The commit which introduced the fn arguments is part of a much larger change > that created a separate rb-tree for the retransmit queue: > > commit 75c119afe14f74b4dd967d75ed9f57ab6c0ef045 > Author: Eric Dumazet > Date: Thu Oct 5 22:21:27 2017 -0700 > > tcp: implement rb-tree based retransmit queue > > I can backport the portion of this change which basically does this: > > +enum tcp_queue { > + TCP_FRAG_IN_WRITE_QUEUE, > + TCP_FRAG_IN_RTX_QUEUE, > +}; > +int tcp_fragment(struct sock *sk, enum tcp_queue tcp_queue, > + struct sk_buff *skb, u32 len, > + unsigned int mss_now, gfp_t gfp); > > and the corresponding call-sites of tcp_fragment(). If we do that then > Eric's fix (b6653b3629e5b88202be3c9abc44713973f5c4b4) should apply cleanly > on top of linux-4.14.y. I'm happy to do that if you'd rather go that route. Yes, that is what I was thinking of, thanks. You expressed it much better than I could have before my morning coffee :) > If you want the full rb-tree change into 4.14 then I would defer that to > Eric, but would argue that IMHO is probably too invasive of a change for a > LTS kernel. No, I don't think we should do that work for 4.14. Also, your change would be suitable for backporting to the older stable kernels that also need this (4.9.y and 4.4.y.) thanks, greg k-h