This test makes sure we do send a FIN on close() if the receive queue contains data that was consumed. Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet --- .../net/packetdrill/tcp_close_no_rst.pkt | 32 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+) create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/tcp_close_no_rst.pkt diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/tcp_close_no_rst.pkt b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/tcp_close_no_rst.pkt new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..eef01d5f1118 --- /dev/null +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/tcp_close_no_rst.pkt @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +--mss=1000 + +`./defaults.sh` + +// Initialize connection + 0 socket(..., SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP) = 3 + +0 setsockopt(3, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, [1], 4) = 0 + +0 bind(3, ..., ...) = 0 + +0 listen(3, 1) = 0 + + +0 < S 0:0(0) win 32792 + +0 > S. 0:0(0) ack 1 + +.1 < . 1:1(0) ack 1 win 32792 + + + +0 accept(3, ..., ...) = 4 + +0 < . 1:1001(1000) ack 1 win 32792 + +0 > . 1:1(0) ack 1001 + +0 read(4, ..., 1000) = 1000 + +// resend the payload + a FIN + +0 < F. 1:1001(1000) ack 1 win 32792 +// Why do we have a delay and no dsack ? + +0~+.04 > . 1:1(0) ack 1002 + + +0 close(4) = 0 + +// According to RFC 2525, section 2.17 +// we should _not_ send an RST here, because there was no data to consume. + +0 > F. 1:1(0) ack 1002 -- 2.51.0.338.gd7d06c2dae-goog