Messages in this thread | | | From | Eric Dumazet <> | Date | Tue, 2 Jan 2024 11:06:05 +0100 | Subject | Re: Bug report connect to VM with Vagrant |
| |
On Tue, Jan 2, 2024 at 10:55 AM Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 10:49:58AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 9:33 AM Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Dec 15, 2023 at 10:55:05AM +0100, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote: > > > > On 08.12.23 11:49, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > > On Thu, Dec 7, 2023 at 2:03 PM Shachar Kagan <skagan@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > > >>>> On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 2:55 PM Shachar Kagan <skagan@nvidia.com> wrote: > > > > >>>> > > > > >>>> I have an issue that bisection pointed at this patch: > > > > >>>> commit 0a8de364ff7a14558e9676f424283148110384d6 > > > > >>>> tcp: no longer abort SYN_SENT when receiving some ICMP > > > > >>> > > > > >>> Please provide tcpdump/pcap captures. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> It is hard to say what is going on just by looking at some application logs. > > > > >> > > > > >> I managed to capture the tcpdump of ‘Vagrant up’ step over old kernel and new kernel where this step fails. Both captures are attached. > > > > >> The tcpdump is filtered by given IP of the nested VM. > > > > > > > > > > I do not see any ICMP messages in these files, can you get them ? > > > > > > > > > > Feel free to continue this exchange privately, no need to send MB > > > > > email to various lists. > > > > > > > > Here this thread died, so I assume this turned out to be not a > > > > regression at all or something like that? If not please speak up! > > > > > > No, it wasn't fixed and/or reverted. Right now, Vagrant is broken and > > > all our regressions around nested VM functionality doesn't run. > > > > > > Eric, can you please revert the bisected patch while you are continuing > > > your offline discussion with Shachar? > > > > > > > This is not how things work. > > > > I have not received any evidence yet, only partial packet dumps with > > no ICMP messages that could be related to the 'Vagrant issue' > > Revert of the original patch worked, so it is strong enough evidence to do > not break very popular orchestration software. > > > > > Patch is adhering to the RFC. > > > > If an application wants to have fast reaction to ICMP, it must use > > appropriate socket options instead of relying on a prior > > implementation detail. > > Maybe yes, maybe not. Right now, Vagrant is broken.
Maybe, but after one month, I still have not received any evidence of the issue.
| |