From: John Salmon <jsalmon@thesalmons.org>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-net@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@redhat.com
Subject: Re: negative tcp_tw_count and other TIME_WAIT weirdness?
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 10:12:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3brwedvd9.fsf@river.fishnet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030701.012107.42800729.davem@redhat.com> (David S. Miller's message of "Tue, 01 Jul 2003 01:21:07 -0700 (PDT)")
Thanks for the tip. I'll try the patch.
Another question - is there any chance that this bug could be
responsible for a slowdown in network processing. Some of my machines
get themselves into a state in which their ability to serve
network traffic (they're running squid) is significantly reduced -
perhaps by a factor of two. I wish I had more specific data, but at
this point it's a mystery. What I'm really wondering is whether
there's any chance at all that this kernel bug could be behind my
performance problem, or should I look elsewhere.
TIA,
John Salmon
>>>>> "David" == David S Miller <davem@redhat.com> writes:
David> From: John Salmon <jsalmon@thesalmons.org>
David> Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 17:25:16 -0700
David> I have several fairly busy servers reporting a negative value
David> for tcp_tw_count.
David> I have a sneaking suspicion that this patch (already in 2.4.22-preX)
David> will fix your problem.
David> # This is a BitKeeper generated patch for the following project:
David> # Project Name: Linux kernel tree
David> # This patch format is intended for GNU patch command version 2.5 or higher.
David> # This patch includes the following deltas:
David> # ChangeSet 1.930.114.22 -> 1.930.114.23
David> # net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c 1.13 -> 1.14
David> #
David> # The following is the BitKeeper ChangeSet Log
David> # --------------------------------------------
David> # 03/05/07 olof@austin.ibm.com 1.930.114.23
David> # [TCP]: tcp_twkill leaves death row list in inconsistent state over tcp_timewait_kill.
David> # --------------------------------------------
David> #
David> diff -Nru a/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c
David> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c Tue Jul 1 01:25:26 2003
David> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_minisocks.c Tue Jul 1 01:25:26 2003
David> @@ -447,6 +447,8 @@
David> while((tw = tcp_tw_death_row[tcp_tw_death_row_slot]) != NULL) {
David> tcp_tw_death_row[tcp_tw_death_row_slot] = tw->next_death;
David> + if (tw->next_death)
David> + tw->next_death->pprev_death = tw->pprev_death;
tw-> pprev_death = NULL;
David> spin_unlock(&tw_death_lock);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-07-01 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-07-01 0:25 negative tcp_tw_count and other TIME_WAIT weirdness? John Salmon
2003-07-01 8:21 ` David S. Miller
2003-07-01 17:12 ` John Salmon [this message]
2003-07-01 17:15 ` Nivedita Singhvi
2003-07-01 21:22 ` John Salmon
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=m3brwedvd9.fsf@river.fishnet \
--to=jsalmon@thesalmons.org \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=jmorris@redhat.com \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-net@vger.kernel.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).