Subject: Re: Badness at net/ipv4/inet_connection_sock.c:293

From: Eric Dumazet <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 18:34:00 +0100

Le 14/12/2009 08:45, David Miller a écrit :
> From: Eric Dumazet <[email-masked]>
> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 06:56:31 +0100
> 
>> It seems to me tcp_create_openreq_child() doesnt properly initialize
>> newtp->cookie_values to NULL, but this should not produce warnings like that ?
> 
> If oldtp->cookie_values is NULL, the child's should be as well
> because of sk_clone().

Right, maybe then its a tcp_ack() or a syncookie validation change ?

tcp_v4_rcv()
        bh_lock_sock_nested(sk);
        if (!sock_owned_by_user(sk)) {

        -> tcp_v4_do_rcv()
                -> tcp_v4_hnd_req()
                        -> cookie_v4_check()
                                -> get_cookie_sock()
                                        -> child = syn_recv_sock()
                                        -> inet_csk_reqsk_queue_add(child) (TCP_SYN_RECV socket queued into parent)
                -> tcp_child_process() (backlog... not)
                        -> tcp_rcv_state_process()
                                -> acceptable = tcp_ack() > 0;
                                -> if (acceptable) -> sk_state = TCP_ESTABLISHED
                                        (but if tcp_ack() returned <= 0, state unchanged : TCP_SYN_RECV)

And commit 96e0bf4b5193d0d97d139f99e2dd128763d55521
(tcp: Discard segments that ack data not yet sent)

Did change this area a bit :

@@ -5632,7 +5639,7 @@ int tcp_rcv_state_process(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb,
 
        /* step 5: check the ACK field */
        if (th->ack) {
-               int acceptable = tcp_ack(sk, skb, FLAG_SLOWPATH);
+               int acceptable = tcp_ack(sk, skb, FLAG_SLOWPATH) > 0;
 
                switch (sk->sk_state) {
                case TCP_SYN_RECV: