Testing with iperf3 using the "pasta" protocol splicer has revealed
a bug in the way tcp handles window advertising in extreme memory
squeeze situations. The problem occurs on the server side, and
the socket in question is a completely regular socket with the
default settings for the fedora40 kernel. We do not use SO_PEEK
or SO_RCV_BUF on this socket.
The following excerpt of a logging session, with own comments added,
shows what is happening:
// tcp_v4_rcv(<-)
// tcp_rcv_established(<-)
[5201<->39222]: ==== Activating log @ net/ipv4/tcp_input.c/tcp_data_queue()/5257 ====
[5201<->39222]: tcp_data_queue(->)
[5201<->39222]: DROPPING skb [265600160..265665640], reason: SKB_DROP_REASON_PROTO_MEM
[rcv_nxt 265600160, rcv_wnd 262144, snt_ack 265469200 (0), win_now 131184]
[copied_seq 259909392->260034360 (124968), unread 5565800, qlen 85, ofoq 0]
[5201<->39222]: tcp_data_queue(<-) OFO queue: gap: 65480, len: 0
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_transmit_skb(->)
[5201<->39222]: tcp_select_window(->) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: (inet_csk(sk)->icsk_ack.pending & ICSK_ACK_NOMEM) --> TRUE
[5201<->39222]: tcp_select_window(<-) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160, returning 0
[5201<->39222]: ADVERTISING WIN 0, ACK_SEQ: 265600160
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_transmit_skb(<-) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: tcp_rcv_established(<-)
[5201<->39222]: tcp_v4_rcv(<-)
// Receive queue is at 85 buffers and we are out of memory.
// We drop the incoming buffer, although it is in sequence, and decide
// to send an advertisement with a window of zero.
// We don't update tp->rcv_wnd and tp->rcv_wup accordingly, which means
// we unconditionally shrink the window.
[5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(->)
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(->) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: [new_win = 0, win_now = 131184, 2 * win_now = 262368]
[5201<->39222]: [new_win >= (2 * win_now) ? --> time_to_ack = 0]
[5201<->39222]: NOT calling tcp_send_ack()
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(<-) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(<-) returning 6104 bytes.
[rcv_nxt 265600160, rcv_wnd 262144, snt_ack 265469200 (0), win_now 131184]
[copied_seq 260040464->260040464 (0), unread 5559696, qlen 85, ofoq 0]
// After each read, the algorithm for calculating the new receive
// window in __tcp_cleanup_rbuf() finds it is too small to advertise
// or to update tp->rcv_wnd.
// Meanwhile, the peer thinks the window is zero, and will not send
// any more data to trigger an update from the interrupt mode side.
[5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(->)
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(->) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: [new_win = 262144, win_now = 131184, 2 * win_now = 262368]
[5201<->39222]: [new_win >= (2 * win_now) ? --> time_to_ack = 0]
[5201<->39222]: NOT calling tcp_send_ack()
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(<-) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(<-) returning 131072 bytes.
[rcv_nxt 265600160, rcv_wnd 262144, snt_ack 265469200 (0), win_now 131184]
[copied_seq 260099840->260171536 (71696), unread 5428624, qlen 83, ofoq 0]
// The above pattern repeats again and again, since nothing changes
// between the reads.
[...]
[5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(->)
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(->) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: [new_win = 262144, win_now = 131184, 2 * win_now = 262368]
[5201<->39222]: [new_win >= (2 * win_now) ? --> time_to_ack = 0]
[5201<->39222]: NOT calling tcp_send_ack()
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(<-) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(<-) returning 131072 bytes.
[rcv_nxt 265600160, rcv_wnd 262144, snt_ack 265469200 (0), win_now 131184]
[copied_seq 265469200->265545488 (76288), unread 54672, qlen 1, ofoq 0]
[5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(->)
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(->) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: [new_win = 262144, win_now = 131184, 2 * win_now = 262368]
[5201<->39222]: [new_win >= (2 * win_now) ? --> time_to_ack = 0]
[5201<->39222]: NOT calling tcp_send_ack()
[5201<->39222]: __tcp_cleanup_rbuf(<-) tp->rcv_wup: 265469200, tp->rcv_wnd: 262144, tp->rcv_nxt 265600160
[5201<->39222]: tcp_recvmsg_locked(<-) returning 54672 bytes.
[rcv_nxt 265600160, rcv_wnd 262144, snt_ack 265469200 (0), win_now 131184]
[copied_seq 265600160->265600160 (0), unread 0, qlen 0, ofoq 0]
// The receive queue is empty, but no new advertisement is sent.
// The peer still thinks the receive window is zero, and sends nothing.
// We have ended up in a deadlock situation.
Furthermore, we have observed that in these situations this side may
send out an updated 'th->ack_seq´ which is not stored in tp->rcv_wup
as it should be. Backing ack_seq seems to be harmless, but is of
course still wrong from a protocol viewpoint.
We fix this by setting tp->rcv_wnd and tp->rcv_wup even when a packet
has been dropped because of memory exhaustion and we have to advertize
a zero window.
Further testing shows that the connection recovers neatly from the
squeeze situation, and traffic can continue indefinitely.
Fixes: e2142825c120 ("net: tcp: send zero-window ACK when no memory")
Signed-off-by: Jon Maloy