From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDE4838B148 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 17:26:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782235608; cv=none; b=NdYMVNgWG/an32nzr6bIdnfRk8jHF9uUEJgNe1rMgbRPhaUf7TYLkF48+1jsE+SHeTAhW4HXlOFDtD45joeepxKyvBR/gxprmfzW/BcMqiAtPye+cTNCduHpqrynYq/UZ1IOlXgrru484gviT3BX8PH8tPoNrV+5MPN0EeewWN4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782235608; c=relaxed/simple; bh=rip9uRV7z1MrHq44c9P9AtUk8yQpQ+kZiXRL/p9vnmE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=CutssQvcknTLOfm1rZSNUQX1RzXaThqvCGoMXRqSlj9JacinXe2wjAN7SbKN6TYqVVC7odwGLf0j1V83MvbkoF8gDGDTZ19zf6SOotDjUT90PVbONdSXZdjI0gIp3w/NUK55wKHggWDZ7axvey72CCszGxlEhGLIDT0EDB2VuGk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=UMHkL/cB; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=RWtN+S3w; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="UMHkL/cB"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="RWtN+S3w" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1782235606; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=lVPkNP6BJkSGxsw8Xm+oSCJFyrrNmnKR4VG6pNKWuqE=; b=UMHkL/cBt9u4LU5O9Ozvgx4IZp1j7yLBffa2cpF18SDH9hmeWTZi6O5GC7Rq73z+C2a+MT yHQY2ZI3EtM6J/qvuFBc5xjxnZ7hDafE4MqeLBvHb/Bvp0p/wmMDhUFtuS1q4TquQRxc+c s7WbtS1iVZiM5zn0GHVfciHrMEirlq8= Received: from mail-wr1-f71.google.com (mail-wr1-f71.google.com [209.85.221.71]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-314-rNqCsGLJOUSKlWRz-O231g-1; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 13:26:45 -0400 X-MC-Unique: rNqCsGLJOUSKlWRz-O231g-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: rNqCsGLJOUSKlWRz-O231g_1782235604 Received: by mail-wr1-f71.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-463aaa77ffeso68635f8f.3 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 10:26:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=google; t=1782235604; x=1782840404; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=lVPkNP6BJkSGxsw8Xm+oSCJFyrrNmnKR4VG6pNKWuqE=; b=RWtN+S3w5nUnDU9qN4AoM9hgBMTiCfuemcvk1UVk3ycFf04W1NwFhoIT/S8taijT6n +TSL5al3pOADiNNudozhS9kKueRxCMGUJJoW2tMLlAkZpnuWkxFfl19j6VVo5Z7KI3YL XL7jA1wsIi7tfbeHVmtXXdmRVJS2eIXw+R+JO1XQzzRdV6I7DG25K5wZMdF2hWS/1VOf +RObMIf6tfT4LxmDIjcFwvMjOwDs7IJEZLR+YZwPphF/fDxJ9NnDVEx69qxs15zDgH/v FDimkDQYi8zSebcreC8GXjd6wHWXCgpUKtwjNNFRDIQVmDaEJCED/JOhAoqHh32UEizf HjWQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1782235604; x=1782840404; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=lVPkNP6BJkSGxsw8Xm+oSCJFyrrNmnKR4VG6pNKWuqE=; b=ZU/dKwIK53cevnLVXaPIwwdIVAa+rX+QFfZSeVh9GoivIH2AxVw9APtldBfFEIUWNF 2MHs41IPv3ci3mOZwlyZx75OFyJ2XUb9KGk5EIUMvgG4Px2RSzxRoUd8ru44/SGZw9K0 lFhFUQcdDFK5dc7uCHgkEYtRECmnCSRTTSBgo/9LBvd80RQP9ayCtO8yUkfTNggCQ8Rb dwsAltN1TVh76R91vRIpagYbgYJUAaRULQEbPzCbrfVmk0uT/YSd5JVWhUZNXwjcduNU FC/gVnh7GBcSdn4m+xGh8I2cumM+Vh0GAtJbL1mITWtHkw0HVqYysMjCW+8THKDlBaBs Is5g== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AFNElJ8HkUTPvwHA7gkxeUdloab2JXJaghECfPSbg1ixpY5vb75fmPxd40sE0Y/sSfOi6xw+qbo=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzG0N+ETTu8tsmwunQpnMTisswJzj3Ow0HaoEzpzlRiqvHk0vxB 4OEPHrm8f831hiaf/duK3BuCrrQqewKV/5UedQBZSGUd9RNUb03WLu6Um3FZvZgbOrEEOrOXrd0 iFMYo7HjtVSRPvJEv98FP6htNursY4bKVCz0EkpTzKYjk1az2d/HJKQ== X-Gm-Gg: AfdE7cnjL9gXVA8JgtZ4LuyLq9EmEtSjuv8S+cNdhqBhHuPNpqiK8yLFcYjmBsIPWZ5 OMkBczWRtK4PjSASCLtXDHFKdbdumYoVTf66H8aktEs0HumLIKmsPniME4d/tCSDqeuAYXGiD2l NF+Jjd79Ixf8eQ2WIC6lQ9PrSRidICHr9cpkbxBzKgIVCtznSZadvjuAMeFBzdtvxXRSsXpwFRY r1wNA0olFWq2G+PcWKxB008Je+wkbuErdHiU/qS83fiA28CupUr1amGwrdmriXc4FVu836KE3Si FD4CSUxe3fvto7T7fJYtk9Va9iYTRxvHm1V+ycSgLphEN0UxKgPaEZBd3q4MacHfxzNertt7C2k 4Y/0jcOEktfkNFFeaCCaK/EiqLcMGGJ2U X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:d4:b0:488:ac01:72de with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49240e20de0mr257222805e9.5.1782235603239; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 10:26:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:d4:b0:488:ac01:72de with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49240e20de0mr257222385e9.5.1782235602685; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 10:26:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com (IGLD-80-230-85-71.inter.net.il. [80.230.85.71]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-4923fd15535sm425803415e9.3.2026.06.23.10.26.39 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 23 Jun 2026 10:26:41 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2026 13:26:38 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Arseniy Krasnov Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , Stefano Garzarella , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Jason Wang , Bobby Eshleman , Xuan Zhuo , Eugenio =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E9rez?= , Simon Horman , kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, oxffffaa@gmail.com, rulkc@linuxtesting.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] vsock/virtio: rewrite MSG_ZEROCOPY flag handling Message-ID: <20260623132014-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20260623153819.697635-1-avkrasnov@rulkc.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260623153819.697635-1-avkrasnov@rulkc.org> On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 06:38:19PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: > Logically it was based on TCP implementation, so to make further support > easier, rewrite it in the TCP way (like in 'tcp_sendmsg_locked()'). This > patch only rewrites flag handling (e.g. it doesn't change logic). > > Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov It seems to change logic though: > --- > Changelog v1->v2: > * Rebase on last 'net-next'. Don't need 'skb_zcopy_set()' now - it was > already added. > Changelog v2->v3: > * Update commit message. > * Remove one empty line. > > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 47 ++++++++++++------------- > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c > index 09475007165b..41c2a0b82a8e 100644 > --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c > +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c > @@ -328,38 +328,35 @@ static int virtio_transport_send_pkt_info(struct vsock_sock *vsk, > if (pkt_len == 0 && info->op == VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_RW) > return pkt_len; > > - if (info->msg) { > - /* If zerocopy is not enabled by 'setsockopt()', we behave as > - * there is no MSG_ZEROCOPY flag set. > + if (info->msg && (info->msg->msg_flags & MSG_ZEROCOPY)) { > + /* If 'info->msg' is not NULL, this is only VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_RW. > + * 'MSG_ZEROCOPY' flag handling here is based on the same flag > + * handling from 'tcp_sendmsg_locked()'. > */ > - if (!sock_flag(sk_vsock(vsk), SOCK_ZEROCOPY)) > - info->msg->msg_flags &= ~MSG_ZEROCOPY; So previously without SOCK_ZEROCOPY, MSG_ZEROCOPY was always ignored... > + if (info->msg->msg_ubuf) { > + uarg = info->msg->msg_ubuf; > + can_zcopy = virtio_transport_can_zcopy(t_ops, info, pkt_len); now it's not in this case? Maybe the right call, but saying "does not change logic" seems wrong. > + } else if (sock_flag(sk_vsock(vsk), SOCK_ZEROCOPY)) { > + uarg = msg_zerocopy_realloc(sk_vsock(vsk), pkt_len, > + NULL, false); > + if (!uarg) { > + virtio_transport_put_credit(vvs, pkt_len); > + return -ENOMEM; > + } > > - if (info->msg->msg_flags & MSG_ZEROCOPY) > can_zcopy = virtio_transport_can_zcopy(t_ops, info, pkt_len); > + if (!can_zcopy) > + uarg_to_msgzc(uarg)->zerocopy = 0; > > + have_uref = true; > + } > + > + /* 'can_zcopy' means that this transmission will be > + * in zerocopy way (e.g. using 'frags' array). > + */ > if (can_zcopy) > max_skb_len = min_t(u32, VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE, > (MAX_SKB_FRAGS * PAGE_SIZE)); > - > - if (info->msg->msg_flags & MSG_ZEROCOPY && > - info->op == VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_RW) { > - uarg = info->msg->msg_ubuf; > - > - if (!uarg) { > - uarg = msg_zerocopy_realloc(sk_vsock(vsk), > - pkt_len, NULL, false); > - if (!uarg) { > - virtio_transport_put_credit(vvs, pkt_len); > - return -ENOMEM; > - } > - > - if (!can_zcopy) > - uarg_to_msgzc(uarg)->zerocopy = 0; > - > - have_uref = true; > - } > - } > } > > rest_len = pkt_len; > -- > 2.25.1