Re: [PATCH] dhcp: Use bound_time for retransmission timers

Michael Johnson <mjohnson459 at gmail.com>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.ell
Message-ID <CACsRnHU8uhpdyZwQXJrWo=EsKK-CmvO4OHoTBt_RnoDaBtRUhg@mail.gmail.com>
Great, thank you!

I'll run this patch on master over the weekend and see if I can get
more data for the other issue.

Regards,
Michael

On Fri, 13 May 2022 at 17:23, Denis Kenzior <denkenz(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> On 5/13/22 10:40, Michael Johnson wrote:
> > Sorry, I put the log for the t2 retry. Putting it in the right place
> > gives us our problem though
> >
> > ```
> > May 13 15:38:34 r2-19006 iwd[39610]: [DHCPv4] dhcp_client_t1_expired:630
> > May 13 15:38:34 r2-19006 iwd[39610]: [DHCPv4]
> > dhcp_client_t1_expired:632 Entering state: DHCP_STATE_RENEWING
> > May 13 15:38:34 r2-19006 iwd[39610]: [DHCPv4] dhcp_client_send_request:397
> > May 13 15:38:34 r2-19006 iwd[39610]: [DHCPv4]
> > dhcp_client_t1_expired:642 next_timeout t2: 225
> > May 13 15:38:34 r2-19006 iwd[39610]: [DHCPv4]
> > dhcp_client_t1_expired:651 next_timeout t1 retry: 896458022
>
> Ugh, looks like commit:
> c78ad1bb6d7e ("dhcp: Set lease expiry based on frame reception times")
>
> broke this.  It is mixing up SO_TIMESTAMP which is from CLOCK_REALTIME and our
> bound_time which is supposed to be in CLOCK_BOOTTIME.
>
> No wonder the timeout way too long :)
>
> Let me send another fixup patch.
>
> Regards,
> -Denis
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.