[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
Subject[patch 31/47] tcp FRTO: Fix fallback to conventional recovery
-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let us know.

From: Ilpo Järvinen <>

[ upstream commit: a1c1f281b84a751fdb5ff919da3b09df7297619f ]

It seems that commit 009a2e3e4ec ("[TCP] FRTO: Improve
interoperability with other undo_marker users") run into
another land-mine which caused fallback to conventional
recovery to break:

1. Cumulative ACK arrives after FRTO retransmission
2. tcp_try_to_open sees zero retrans_out, clears retrans_stamp
which should be kept like in CA_Loss state it would be
3. undo_marker change allowed tcp_packet_delayed to return
true because of the cleared retrans_stamp once FRTO is
terminated causing LossUndo to occur, which means all loss
markings FRTO made are reverted.

This means that the conventional recovery basically recovered
one loss per RTT, which is not that efficient. It was quite
unobvious that the undo_marker change broken something like
this, I had a quite long session to track it down because of
the non-intuitiviness of the bug (luckily I had a trivial
reproducer at hand and I was also able to learn to use kprobes
in the process as well :-)).

This together with the NewReno+FRTO fix and FRTO in-order
workaround this fixes Damon's problems, this and the first
mentioned are enough to fix Bugzilla #10063.

Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <>
Reported-by: Damon L. Chesser <>
Tested-by: Damon L. Chesser <>
Tested-by: Sebastian Hyrwall <>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <>
Signed-off-by: Chris Wright <>
net/ipv4/tcp_input.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_input.c
@@ -2465,7 +2465,7 @@ static void tcp_try_to_open(struct sock


- if (tp->retrans_out == 0)
+ if (!tp->frto_counter && tp->retrans_out == 0)
tp->retrans_stamp = 0;

if (flag & FLAG_ECE)
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-14 02:25    [W:0.162 / U:4.496 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site