From: Luigi Leonardi <leonardi@redhat.com>
To: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
Cc: "Stefan Hajnoczi" <stefanha@redhat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
"Jason Wang" <jasowang@redhat.com>,
"Xuan Zhuo" <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>,
"Eugenio Pérez" <eperezma@redhat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"Simon Horman" <horms@kernel.org>,
"Arseniy Krasnov" <avkrasnov@salutedevices.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] vsock/test: add MSG_PEEK after partial recv test
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2026 13:40:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ac-mZ9vHII96dTtP@leonardi-redhat> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ac5qWSEBM--HuKQK@sgarzare-redhat>
On Thu, Apr 02, 2026 at 03:28:25PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>On Thu, Apr 02, 2026 at 10:18:02AM +0200, Luigi Leonardi wrote:
>>Add a test that verifies MSG_PEEK works correctly after a partial
>>recv().
>>
>>This is to test a bug that was present in the `virtio_transport_stream_do_peek()`
>
>WARNING: Prefer a maximum 75 chars per line (possible unwrapped commit description?)
>#11: This is to test a bug that was present in the
>`virtio_transport_stream_do_peek()`
>
oops, thanks :)
>>when computing the number of bytes to copy: After a partial read, the
>>peek function didn't take into consideration the number of bytes that
>>were already read. So peeking the whole buffer would cause a out-of-bounds read,
>>that resulted in a -EFAULT.
>>
>>This test does exactly this: do a partial recv on a buffer, then try to
>>peek the whole buffer content.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Luigi Leonardi <leonardi@redhat.com>
>>---
>>tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>1 file changed, 64 insertions(+)
>>
>>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>>index 5bd20ccd9335caafe68e8b7a5d02a4deb3d2deec..308f9f8f30d22bec5aaa282356e400d8438fe321 100644
>>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>>@@ -346,6 +346,65 @@ static void test_stream_msg_peek_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
>> return test_msg_peek_server(opts, false);
>>}
>>
>>+#define PEEK_AFTER_RECV_LEN 100
>
>Why 100 ?
>Better to use a power of 2 IMO like we do in all other cases IIRC.
>
Right, I'll reuse `MSG_PEEK_BUF_LEN`.
>>+
>>+static void test_stream_peek_after_recv_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
>>+{
>>+ unsigned char buf[PEEK_AFTER_RECV_LEN];
>>+ int fd;
>>+ int i;
>
>nit: int fd, i;
>
>>+
>>+ fd = vsock_stream_connect(opts->peer_cid, opts->peer_port);
>>+ if (fd < 0) {
>>+ perror("connect");
>>+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>>+ }
>>+
>>+ for (i = 0; i < sizeof(buf); i++)
>>+ buf[i] = (unsigned char)i;
>
>Why setting the payload in this way ? Can we just do a memset() ?
Good point.
>
>>+
>>+ control_expectln("SRVREADY");
>
>Why we need this barrier ?
leftover from development, will remove.
>
>>+
>>+ send_buf(fd, buf, sizeof(buf), 0, sizeof(buf));
>>+
>>+ close(fd);
>>+}
>>+
>>+static void test_stream_peek_after_recv_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
>>+{
>>+ unsigned char buf[PEEK_AFTER_RECV_LEN];
>>+ int half = PEEK_AFTER_RECV_LEN / 2;
>>+ ssize_t ret;
>>+ int fd;
>>+
>>+ fd = vsock_stream_accept(VMADDR_CID_ANY, opts->peer_port, NULL);
>>+ if (fd < 0) {
>>+ perror("accept");
>>+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>>+ }
>>+
>>+ control_writeln("SRVREADY");
>>+
>>+ /* Partial recv to advance offset within the skb */
>>+ recv_buf(fd, buf, half, 0, half);
>
>Why reading half of the size ?
>
>IMO is better to read just 1 byte, since it is almost certain that an
>skb does not have a 1-byte payload.
>
will do
>>+
>>+ /* Try to peek more than what remains: should return only 'half'
>
>How we are sure that the sender sent all the bytes ?
>
>>+ * bytes. Note: we can't use recv_buf() because it loops until
>>+ * all requested bytes are returned.
>
>Why this is a problem ? (an useful comment should explain the reason)
>
Some changes are required to `recv_buf`, I have a working v2 version
that uses that. Thanks for the hint.
>>+ */
>>+ ret = recv(fd, buf, sizeof(buf), MSG_PEEK);
>>+ if (ret < 0) {
>
>Should we handle EINTR like we do in recv_buf() ?
>But I still don't understand why we can't use it directly.
>
>Thanks,
>Stefano
>
>>+ perror("recv");
>>+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>>+ } else if (ret != half) {
>>+ fprintf(stderr, "MSG_PEEK after partial recv returned %d (expected %d)\n",
>>+ ret, half);
>>+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>>+ }
>>+
>>+ close(fd);
>>+}
>>+
>>#define SOCK_BUF_SIZE (2 * 1024 * 1024)
>>#define SOCK_BUF_SIZE_SMALL (64 * 1024)
>>#define MAX_MSG_PAGES 4
>>@@ -2520,6 +2579,11 @@ static struct test_case test_cases[] = {
>> .run_client = test_stream_tx_credit_bounds_client,
>> .run_server = test_stream_tx_credit_bounds_server,
>> },
>>+ {
>>+ .name = "SOCK_STREAM MSG_PEEK after partial recv",
>>+ .run_client = test_stream_peek_after_recv_client,
>>+ .run_server = test_stream_peek_after_recv_server,
>>+ },
>> {},
>>};
>>
>>
>>--
>>2.53.0
>>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-03 11:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-02 8:18 [PATCH net 0/2] vsock/virtio: fix MSG_PEEK calculation on bytes to copy Luigi Leonardi
2026-04-02 8:18 ` [PATCH net 1/2] vsock/virtio: fix MSG_PEEK ignoring skb offset when calculating " Luigi Leonardi
2026-04-02 13:08 ` Stefano Garzarella
2026-04-05 19:22 ` Arseniy Krasnov
2026-04-02 8:18 ` [PATCH net 2/2] vsock/test: add MSG_PEEK after partial recv test Luigi Leonardi
2026-04-02 13:28 ` Stefano Garzarella
2026-04-03 11:40 ` Luigi Leonardi [this message]
2026-04-05 19:14 ` Arseniy Krasnov
2026-04-07 8:45 ` Luigi Leonardi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ac-mZ9vHII96dTtP@leonardi-redhat \
--to=leonardi@redhat.com \
--cc=avkrasnov@salutedevices.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eperezma@redhat.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sgarzare@redhat.com \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox