Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ipv4: Namespaceify tcp_fastopen_key knob
> On 2017年9月27日, at 上午2:18, David Miller wrote: > > From: 严海双 > Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 09:25:51 +0800 > >>> On 2017年9月26日, at 上午7:24, David Miller wrote: >>> >>> From: Haishuang Yan >>> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:48:43 +0800 >>> @@ -9,13 +9,18 @@ #include #include -struct tcp_fastopen_context __rcu *tcp_fastopen_ctx; - -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(tcp_fastopen_ctx_lock); - -void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(bool publish) +void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(struct net *net) >>> >>> Why did you remove the 'publish' logic from this function? >>> >> >> I think this logic is not necessary now, in proc_tcp_fastopen_key, I have >> removed >> tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(false) where the ‘publish’ is false: >> >> -/* Generate a dummy secret but don't publish it. This >> - * is needed so we don't regenerate a new key on the >> - * first invocation of tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen >> - */ >> -tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(false); >> -tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher(user_key, TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH); >> +tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher(net, user_key, >> TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH); >> >> It said we don't regenerate a new key on first invocation of >> tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen, >> but in tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen，it didn’t call tcp_fastopen_init_key_once >> since >> from commit dfea2aa654243 (tcp: Do not call tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher from >> interrupt context)： >> >> And in other places where call tcp_fastopen_init_key_once, the ‘publish’ is >> always true: > > Ok, this simplification seems legitimate. > > But it is unrelated to this namespacification. So it should be in a separate > patch, > and should be documented well in the commit message using the great > explanation you > gave to me above. > > Please respin this series, with this patch #2 split up into two changes. > > Thank you. Okay， thanks David for advise. I will split the patch #2 in next commit.
Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ipv4: Namespaceify tcp_fastopen_key knob
From: 严海双 Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 09:25:51 +0800 >> On 2017年9月26日, at 上午7:24, David Miller wrote: >> >> From: Haishuang Yan >> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:48:43 +0800 >> >>> @@ -9,13 +9,18 @@ >>> #include >>> #include >>> >>> -struct tcp_fastopen_context __rcu *tcp_fastopen_ctx; >>> - >>> -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(tcp_fastopen_ctx_lock); >>> - >>> -void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(bool publish) >>> +void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(struct net *net) >> >> Why did you remove the 'publish' logic from this function? >> > > I think this logic is not necessary now, in proc_tcp_fastopen_key, I have > removed > tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(false) where the ‘publish’ is false: > > - /* Generate a dummy secret but don't publish it. This > - * is needed so we don't regenerate a new key on the > - * first invocation of tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen > - */ > - tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(false); > - tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher(user_key, TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH); > + tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher(net, user_key, > TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH); > > It said we don't regenerate a new key on first invocation of > tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen, > but in tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen，it didn’t call tcp_fastopen_init_key_once > since > from commit dfea2aa654243 (tcp: Do not call tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher from > interrupt context)： > > And in other places where call tcp_fastopen_init_key_once, the ‘publish’ is > always true: Ok, this simplification seems legitimate. But it is unrelated to this namespacification. So it should be in a separate patch, and should be documented well in the commit message using the great explanation you gave to me above. Please respin this series, with this patch #2 split up into two changes. Thank you.
Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ipv4: Namespaceify tcp_fastopen_key knob
> On 2017年9月26日, at 上午7:24, David Miller wrote:
>
> From: Haishuang Yan
> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:48:43 +0800
>
>> @@ -9,13 +9,18 @@
>> #include
>> #include
>>
>> -struct tcp_fastopen_context __rcu *tcp_fastopen_ctx;
>> -
>> -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(tcp_fastopen_ctx_lock);
>> -
>> -void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(bool publish)
>> +void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(struct net *net)
>
> Why did you remove the 'publish' logic from this function?
>
I think this logic is not necessary now, in proc_tcp_fastopen_key, I have
removed
tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(false) where the ‘publish’ is false:
- /* Generate a dummy secret but don't publish it. This
-* is needed so we don't regenerate a new key on the
-* first invocation of tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen
-*/
- tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(false);
- tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher(user_key, TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH);
+ tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher(net, user_key,
TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH);
It said we don't regenerate a new key on first invocation of
tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen,
but in tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen，it didn’t call tcp_fastopen_init_key_once since
from commit dfea2aa654243 (tcp: Do not call tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher from
interrupt context)：
And in other places where call tcp_fastopen_init_key_once, the ‘publish’ is
always true:
--- a/net/ipv4/af_inet.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/af_inet.c
@@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ int inet_listen(struct socket *sock, int backlog)
(tcp_fastopen & TFO_SERVER_ENABLE) &&
!inet_csk(sk)->icsk_accept_queue.fastopenq.max_qlen) {
fastopen_queue_tune(sk, backlog);
- tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(true);
+ tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(sock_net(sk));
}
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
@@ -2749,7 +2749,7 @@ static int do_tcp_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int level,
case TCP_FASTOPEN:
if (val >= 0 && ((1 << sk->sk_state) & (TCPF_CLOSE |
TCPF_LISTEN))) {
- tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(true);
+ tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(net);
fastopen_queue_tune(sk, val);
} else {
So I deleted ‘publish’ logic to ensure it was always true.
Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] ipv4: Namespaceify tcp_fastopen_key knob
From: Haishuang Yan Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:48:43 +0800 > @@ -9,13 +9,18 @@ > #include > #include > > -struct tcp_fastopen_context __rcu *tcp_fastopen_ctx; > - > -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(tcp_fastopen_ctx_lock); > - > -void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(bool publish) > +void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(struct net *net) Why did you remove the 'publish' logic from this function?
