From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga06.intel.com (mga06.intel.com [134.134.136.31]) (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 D3FED2FB3 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 23:38:57 +0000 (UTC) IronPort-SDR: 8q6O8PYrQHWhsiu7wU5ZZcuLIIFE5nY4f7jtY8qwuZACaMj23hW+9e4CP1BjzwV7WkQFEutNs8 kp8zXC/iH6Tg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6200,9189,10023"; a="268300639" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,292,1616482800"; d="scan'208";a="268300639" Received: from fmsmga006.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.20]) by orsmga104.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jun 2021 16:38:56 -0700 IronPort-SDR: yuX3QlshN4AL5i2ARwtE1UfhEIeQsHqG+oUa31ALpXzTJu0Vu/oJ//Ajg8FqFlKo4ukcim5cAj iEGdqXT0dj5Q== X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.83,292,1616482800"; d="scan'208";a="639267407" Received: from mrsastry-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.212.137.16]) by fmsmga006-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 22 Jun 2021 16:38:56 -0700 Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 16:38:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Mat Martineau To: Jianguo Wu cc: mptcp@lists.linux.dev, pabeni@redhat.com, fw@strlen.de Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] mptcp: fix warning in __skb_flow_dissect() when do syn cookie for subflow join In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <43f673ac-3622-561b-a6af-96fd7d49f01a@linux.intel.com> References: <1623840570-42004-1-git-send-email-wujianguo106@163.com> <1623840570-42004-2-git-send-email-wujianguo106@163.com> <64212e1f-2b62-89dc-b4c5-b0c8bae51962@linux.intel.com> <93307b1f-b402-885e-acd0-b5828a11395b@163.com> X-Mailing-List: mptcp@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed On Mon, 21 Jun 2021, Jianguo Wu wrote: > > > On 2021/6/21 14:14, Jianguo Wu wrote: >> Hi Mat, >> >> On 2021/6/19 6:40, Mat Martineau wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2021, wujianguo106@163.com wrote: >>> >>>> From: Jianguo Wu >>>> >>>> I got the following warning message while doing the test: >>> >>> Hi Jianguo, thanks for your patch set and revisions. >>> >>> Could you explain some more about which test produced the following result? Was it one of the self tests? >>> >>> If this is triggered by test code that is not upstream yet, it would help to add a selftest that shows if this bug is present or fixed. A packetdrill test is also an option, if that is a better way to reproduce the error. >>> >> >> I tested with wrk(https://github.com/wg/wrk) and webfsd(https://github.com/ourway/webfsd) with the assistance of mptcp-tools(https://github.com/pabeni/mptcp-tools), >> Server side: >> ./use_mptcp.sh webfsd -4 -R /tmp/ -p 8099 >> Client side: >> ./use_mptcp.sh wrk -c 200 -d 30 -t 4 http://192.168.174.129:8099/ >> >> I will try self tests. >> > > Hi Mat, > > It can not be reproduced with selftests(./mptcp_join.sh -k), because skb->l4_hash is 1 in this scenario, > and direct using skb->hash, so __skb_flow_dissect() isn't called. > Thanks for the information! We hadn't seen the failures with the self tests so it's good to know that wrk and webfsd were useful for stress testing. -- Mat Martineau Intel