[BUG] tcp : how many times a frame can possibly be retransmitted ?

On one dev machine running net-next, I just found strange tcp sessions
that retransmit a frame forever (The other peer disappeared)

# ss -emoi dst 10.2.1.1
State      Recv-Q Send-Q      Local Address:Port          Peer Address:Port   
ESTAB      0      816              10.2.1.2:37930             10.2.1.1:ssh      timer:(on,630ms,246) ino:60786 sk:ffff8801189aa400
	 mem:(r0,w3776,f320,t0) ts sack ecn cubic wscale:8,6 rto:1680 rtt:16.25/7.5 ato:40 ssthresh:7 send 1.4Mbps rcv_rtt:10 rcv_space:16632


You can see the retransmit count : 246 

What possibly can be going on ?

What happened to backoff ?

# grep . /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_retries*
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_retries1:3
/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_retries2:15



extract of tcpdump :

12:01:02.074244 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16128024 59389>
12:01:03.754243 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16128192 59389>
12:01:05.434245 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16128360 59389>
12:01:07.114243 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16128528 59389>
12:01:08.794248 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16128696 59389>
12:01:10.474242 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16128864 59389>
12:01:12.154243 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16129032 59389>
12:01:13.834241 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16129200 59389>
12:01:15.514246 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16129368 59389>
12:01:17.194244 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16129536 59389>
12:01:18.874248 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16129704 59389>
12:01:20.554243 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16129872 59389>
12:01:22.234244 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16130040 59389>
12:01:23.914244 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16130208 59389>
12:01:25.594247 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16130376 59389>
12:01:27.274242 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16130544 59389>
12:01:28.954242 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16130712 59389>
12:01:30.634248 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16130880 59389>
12:01:32.314245 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16131048 59389>
12:01:33.994243 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16131216 59389>
12:01:35.674250 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16131384 59389>
12:01:37.354244 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16131552 59389>
12:01:39.034245 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16131720 59389>
12:01:40.714245 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16131888 59389>
12:01:42.394245 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16132056 59389>
12:01:44.074242 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16132224 59389>
12:01:45.754249 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16132392 59389>
12:01:47.434242 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16132560 59389>
12:01:49.114247 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16132728 59389>
12:01:50.794250 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16132896 59389>
12:01:52.474247 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16133064 59389>
12:01:54.154242 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16133232 59389>
12:01:55.834246 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16133400 59389>
12:01:57.514243 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16133568 59389>
12:01:59.194247 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16133736 59389>
12:02:00.874250 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16133904 59389>
12:02:02.554242 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16134072 59389>
12:02:04.234243 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16134240 59389>
12:02:05.914245 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16134408 59389>
12:02:07.594244 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16134576 59389>
12:02:09.274249 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16134744 59389>
12:02:10.954241 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16134912 59389>
12:02:12.634249 IP 10.2.1.2.37930 > 10.2.1.1.ssh: P 0:144(144) ack 1 win 1002 <nop,nop,timestamp 16135080 59389>

tcp_retransmit_timer() does the exponential backoff, but something
resets icsk_rto to a low value ?

Ah, it seems to be because of commit f1ecd5d9e7366609 
(Revert Backoff [v3]: Revert RTO on ICMP destination unreachable)

Since arp resolution (or routing, I dont know yet) fails, an
 internal/loopback ICMP host/network unreachable message is 
generated and handled in tcp_v4_err() :

icsk_backoff-- and icsk_rto is reset.

I am afraid this can generate a storm (cpu time at very least),
in case we have many tcp sessions in this state.

I guess its time for me to read RFC 6069