Re: [PATCH v11 00/18] virtio/vsock: introduce SOCK_SEQPACKET support

Arseny Krasnov
2021-06-11T15:00:48Z

On 11.06.2021 17:57, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 05:39:01PM +0300, Arseny Krasnov wrote:
>> On 11.06.2021 15:25, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> Hi Arseny,
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 02:17:00PM +0300, Arseny Krasnov wrote:
>>>> On 11.06.2021 14:07, Arseny Krasnov wrote:
>>>>> This patchset implements support of SOCK_SEQPACKET for virtio
>>>>> transport.
>>>>> As SOCK_SEQPACKET guarantees to save record boundaries, so to
>>>>> do it, new bit for field 'flags' was added: SEQ_EOR. This bit is
>>>>> set to 1 in last RW packet of message.
>>>>> Now as packets of one socket are not reordered neither on vsock
>>>>> nor on vhost transport layers, such bit allows to restore original
>>>>> message on receiver's side. If user's buffer is smaller than message
>>>>> length, when all out of size data is dropped.
>>>>> Maximum length of datagram is limited by 'peer_buf_alloc' value.
>>>>> Implementation also supports 'MSG_TRUNC' flags.
>>>>> Tests also implemented.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks to stsp2@yandex.ru for encouragements and initial design
>>>>> recommendations.
>>>>>
>>>>> Arseny Krasnov (18):
>>>>> af_vsock: update functions for connectible socket
>>>>> af_vsock: separate wait data loop
>>>>> af_vsock: separate receive data loop
>>>>> af_vsock: implement SEQPACKET receive loop
>>>>> af_vsock: implement send logic for SEQPACKET
>>>>> af_vsock: rest of SEQPACKET support
>>>>> af_vsock: update comments for stream sockets
>>>>> virtio/vsock: set packet's type in virtio_transport_send_pkt_info()
>>>>> virtio/vsock: simplify credit update function API
>>>>> virtio/vsock: defines and constants for SEQPACKET
>>>>> virtio/vsock: dequeue callback for SOCK_SEQPACKET
>>>>> virtio/vsock: add SEQPACKET receive logic
>>>>> virtio/vsock: rest of SOCK_SEQPACKET support
>>>>> virtio/vsock: enable SEQPACKET for transport
>>>>> vhost/vsock: enable SEQPACKET for transport
>>>>> vsock/loopback: enable SEQPACKET for transport
>>>>> vsock_test: add SOCK_SEQPACKET tests
>>>>> virtio/vsock: update trace event for SEQPACKET
>>>>>
>>>>> drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 56 ++-
>>>>> include/linux/virtio_vsock.h | 10 +
>>>>> include/net/af_vsock.h | 8 +
>>>>> .../trace/events/vsock_virtio_transport_common.h | 5 +-
>>>>> include/uapi/linux/virtio_vsock.h | 9 +
>>>>> net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 464 ++++++++++++------
>>>>> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 26 ++
>>>>> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 179 +++++++-
>>>>> net/vmw_vsock/vsock_loopback.c | 12 +
>>>>> tools/testing/vsock/util.c | 32 +-
>>>>> tools/testing/vsock/util.h | 3 +
>>>>> tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 116 ++++++
>>>>> 12 files changed, 730 insertions(+), 190 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> v10 -> v11:
>>>>> General changelog:
>>>>> - now data is copied to user's buffer only when
>>>>> whole message is received.
>>>>> - reader is woken up when EOR packet is received.
>>>>> - if read syscall was interrupted by signal or
>>>>> timeout, error is returned(not 0).
>>>>>
>>>>> Per patch changelog:
>>>>> see every patch after '---' line.
>>>> So here is new version for review with updates discussed earlier :)
>>> Thanks, I'll review next week, but I suggest you again to split in two
>>> series, since patchwork (and netdev maintainers) are not happy with a
>>> series of 18 patches.
>>>
>>> If you still prefer to keep them together during development, then
>>> please use the RFC tag.
>>>
>>> Also did you take a look at the FAQ for netdev that I linked last
>>> time?
>>> I don't see the net-next tag...
>> I didn't use next tag because two patches from first seven(which was
>>
>> considered to be sent to netdev) - 0004 and 0006
>>
>> were changed in this patchset(because of last ideas about queueing
>>
>> whole message). So i removed R-b line and now there is no sense to
>>
>> use net-next tag for first patches. When it will be R-b - i'll send it
> Okay, in that case better to use RFC tag.
Ack, for big patchset for LKML i'll RFC tag
>
>> to
>>
>> netdev with such tag and we can continue discussing second part
>>
>> of patches(virtio specific).
> Don't worry for now. You can do it for the next round, but I think all
> the patches will go through netdev and would be better to split in 2
> series, both of them with net-next tag.

Of course, for netdev this patchset will be splitted for two series

Thank You

>
> Thanks,
> Stefano
>
>