On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 10:10:50AM +0200, Martin Pieuchot wrote:
> On 11/07/18(Wed) 09:55, Claudio Jeker wrote:
> > On busy servers I seen multiple RTM_LOSING message per second being
> > generated. This is not helpful (especially since nothing is doing
> > something with it). This diff removes the part where RTM_LOSING is
> > generated
>
> I'm fine with that. However what about adding a tcp_trace() call
> instead? This could still be useful for debugging.
tcp_timer_rexmt() which is the only caller of in_losing() is already doing
a tcp_trace call at the end which is hit in that case.
tcp_trace(TA_TIMER, ostate, tp, otp, NULL, TCPT_REXMT, 0);
There is some other cases in tcp_timer_rexmt() which skip the tcp_trace()
especially the block that calls into icmp_mtudisc().
Will talk to bluhm@ about this once he shows up.
> > but at the same time adds some RTM_ADD / RTM_DELETE messages for
> > the dynamic routes added by the PMTU handlers. In my opinion adding even
> > dynamic routes to the routing table should be communicated on the routing
> > socket (also the removes because of the timeout will already show up).
> > Only lightly tested since I'm not having access to the box I have seen
> > this anymore.
>
> I like it. I'd only call rtm_send(9) if rtrequest() didn't returned an
> error, like it is done in rt_ifa_add/del().
Right, it does not make sense to report that error up.
Adapted the diff to do that.
--
:wq Claudio
Index: netinet/in_pcb.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet/in_pcb.c,v
retrieving revision 1.239
diff -u -p -r1.239 in_pcb.c
--- netinet/in_pcb.c14 Jun 2018 17:16:03 - 1.239
+++ netinet/in_pcb.c10 Jul 2018 21:31:59 -
@@ -709,21 +709,11 @@ in_pcbnotifyall(struct inpcbtable *table
void
in_losing(struct inpcb *inp)
{
- struct rtentry *rt;
- struct rt_addrinfo info;
- struct sockaddr_in6 sa_mask;
+ struct rtentry *rt = inp->inp_route.ro_rt;
- if ((rt = inp->inp_route.ro_rt)) {
- inp->inp_route.ro_rt = 0;
+ if (rt) {
+ inp->inp_route.ro_rt = NULL;
- memset(, 0, sizeof(info));
- info.rti_flags = rt->rt_flags;
- info.rti_info[RTAX_DST] = >inp_route.ro_dst;
- info.rti_info[RTAX_GATEWAY] = rt->rt_gateway;
- info.rti_info[RTAX_NETMASK] = rt_plen2mask(rt, _mask);
-
- rtm_miss(RTM_LOSING, , rt->rt_flags, rt->rt_priority,
- rt->rt_ifidx, 0, inp->inp_rtableid);
if (rt->rt_flags & RTF_DYNAMIC) {
struct ifnet *ifp;
@@ -734,10 +724,8 @@ in_losing(struct inpcb *inp)
* so we're dealing with a stale cache and have
* nothing to do.
*/
- if (ifp != NULL) {
- rtrequest_delete(, rt->rt_priority, ifp,
- NULL, inp->inp_rtableid);
- }
+ if (ifp != NULL)
+ rtdeletemsg(rt, ifp, inp->inp_rtableid);
if_put(ifp);
}
/*
Index: netinet/ip_icmp.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet/ip_icmp.c,v
retrieving revision 1.175
diff -u -p -r1.175 ip_icmp.c
--- netinet/ip_icmp.c 21 May 2018 15:52:22 - 1.175
+++ netinet/ip_icmp.c 11 Jul 2018 08:18:04 -
@@ -990,6 +990,7 @@ icmp_mtudisc_clone(struct in_addr dst, u
nrt->rt_rmx = rt->rt_rmx;
rtfree(rt);
rt = nrt;
+ rtm_send(rt, RTM_ADD, error, rtableid);
}
error = rt_timer_add(rt, icmp_mtudisc_timeout, ip_mtudisc_timeout_q,
rtableid);
Index: netinet6/icmp6.c
===
RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/netinet6/icmp6.c,v
retrieving revision 1.224
diff -u -p -r1.224 icmp6.c
--- netinet6/icmp6.c2 Jun 2018 16:38:21 - 1.224
+++ netinet6/icmp6.c11 Jul 2018 08:17:24 -
@@ -1806,6 +1806,7 @@ icmp6_mtudisc_clone(struct sockaddr *dst
nrt->rt_rmx = rt->rt_rmx;
rtfree(rt);
rt = nrt;
+ rtm_send(rt, RTM_ADD, error, rtableid);
}
error = rt_timer_add(rt, icmp6_mtudisc_timeout, icmp6_mtudisc_timeout_q,
rtableid);
