From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-110.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-110.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.110]) (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 4192F17571; Sat, 11 May 2024 02:26:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.110 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715394394; cv=none; b=Sh+GW2BuDvEnz1vzpriqDiH+7vKxhMrHSa71WS5iQ/kcJnJzy4gtockK3KkSv9wdkVn7QHCv1GpxGqe3XhQ319SHya2UiYR/5IeMZHkSTmfhHxm5ZtODVb1e+Q+bBT0DKrLLIt8pT6Xm13HbdOtl3HH3DQ1vt5vL8oDpn1AYa7k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715394394; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ggxlDlG1YI922LNdSkTT04eRxxTmskXyhjlv/HpRgns=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=eRiHVrsAWVvjUBbfCHT+uU7b/OmjUTxPi1QzHQg7qgq9uLIWYiJ/KxVwHS+Xles1nosIX3blvLTIfm+oyv70YEnX3L3rB5C7KgczV4bS3o2m1fRKoY6ajVGRfHjAZxYIya2iLtOINkNrCAjyWLZC2bcExMrxIWVdF/K7byZ6HPs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=ZLWaqRDv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.110 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="ZLWaqRDv" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1715394388; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type; bh=45JX5gKumjUQPmfnJ1Yt8cEHN4bW1vuhVImqRYRShoI=; b=ZLWaqRDvje8P9PsZYX4NH7863DCX513vQyrGSy6rtq5C+Ku3BDT6qCQscHzcARqfvQxk6DVgVFjqKwcWOcqAI5COkgC/nr3skqCunkg/+3eKg9tlDUXrtZ74nz+Pv3hQP17MN6wBRCHHkjq+or8wHk04ezqh5dbmlufjXSNQz9c= X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R121e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=maildocker-contentspam033068173054;MF=alibuda@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=14;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0W6BhZQd_1715394384; Received: from 30.221.147.218(mailfrom:alibuda@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0W6BhZQd_1715394384) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Sat, 11 May 2024 10:26:27 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Sat, 11 May 2024 10:26:23 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net/smc: refatoring initialization of smc sock To: dust.li@linux.alibaba.com, kgraul@linux.ibm.com, wenjia@linux.ibm.com, jaka@linux.ibm.com, wintera@linux.ibm.com, guwen@linux.alibaba.com Cc: kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, tonylu@linux.alibaba.com, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com References: <1715314333-107290-1-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> <1715314333-107290-2-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> <20240510095027.GA78725@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Language: en-US From: "D. Wythe" In-Reply-To: <20240510095027.GA78725@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 5/10/24 5:50 PM, Dust Li wrote: > On 2024-05-10 12:12:12, D. Wythe wrote: >> From: "D. Wythe" >> >> This patch aims to isolate the shared components of SMC socket >> allocation by introducing smc_sock_init() for sock initialization >> and __smc_create_clcsk() for the initialization of clcsock. >> >> This is in preparation for the subsequent implementation of the >> AF_INET version of SMC. >> >> Signed-off-by: D. Wythe >> --- >> net/smc/af_smc.c | 93 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- >> 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c >> index 9389f0c..1f03724 100644 >> --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c >> +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c >> @@ -361,34 +361,43 @@ static void smc_destruct(struct sock *sk) >> return; >> } >> >> -static struct sock *smc_sock_alloc(struct net *net, struct socket *sock, >> - int protocol) >> +static void smc_sock_init(struct net *net, struct sock *sk, int protocol) >> { >> - struct smc_sock *smc; >> - struct proto *prot; >> - struct sock *sk; >> - >> - prot = (protocol == SMCPROTO_SMC6) ? &smc_proto6 : &smc_proto; >> - sk = sk_alloc(net, PF_SMC, GFP_KERNEL, prot, 0); >> - if (!sk) >> - return NULL; >> + struct smc_sock *smc = smc_sk(sk); >> >> - sock_init_data(sock, sk); /* sets sk_refcnt to 1 */ >> sk->sk_state = SMC_INIT; >> - sk->sk_destruct = smc_destruct; >> sk->sk_protocol = protocol; >> + mutex_init(&smc->clcsock_release_lock); >> WRITE_ONCE(sk->sk_sndbuf, 2 * READ_ONCE(net->smc.sysctl_wmem)); >> WRITE_ONCE(sk->sk_rcvbuf, 2 * READ_ONCE(net->smc.sysctl_rmem)); >> - smc = smc_sk(sk); >> INIT_WORK(&smc->tcp_listen_work, smc_tcp_listen_work); >> INIT_WORK(&smc->connect_work, smc_connect_work); >> INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&smc->conn.tx_work, smc_tx_work); >> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&smc->accept_q); >> spin_lock_init(&smc->accept_q_lock); >> spin_lock_init(&smc->conn.send_lock); >> - sk->sk_prot->hash(sk); >> - mutex_init(&smc->clcsock_release_lock); >> smc_init_saved_callbacks(smc); >> + smc->limit_smc_hs = net->smc.limit_smc_hs; >> + smc->use_fallback = false; /* assume rdma capability first */ >> + smc->fallback_rsn = 0; >> + >> + sk->sk_destruct = smc_destruct; >> + sk->sk_prot->hash(sk); > Why change the order here ? e.g. > > Before: > sk->sk_destruct = smc_destruct; > mutex_init(&smc->clcsock_release_lock); > After > mutex_init(&smc->clcsock_release_lock); > sk->sk_destruct = smc_destruct; > > Same for sk->sk_prot->hash(sk) Yes, you are right, I will fix it in the next version. > > >> +} >> + >> +static struct sock *smc_sock_alloc(struct net *net, struct socket *sock, >> + int protocol) >> +{ >> + struct proto *prot; >> + struct sock *sk; >> + >> + prot = (protocol == SMCPROTO_SMC6) ? &smc_proto6 : &smc_proto; >> + sk = sk_alloc(net, PF_SMC, GFP_KERNEL, prot, 0); >> + if (!sk) >> + return NULL; >> + >> + sock_init_data(sock, sk); /* sets sk_refcnt to 1 */ >> + smc_sock_init(net, sk, protocol); >> >> return sk; >> } >> @@ -3321,6 +3330,31 @@ static ssize_t smc_splice_read(struct socket *sock, loff_t *ppos, >> .splice_read = smc_splice_read, >> }; >> >> +static int __smc_create_clcsk(struct net *net, struct sock *sk, int family) > Why add '__' prefix here ? Good question, I also realize that this is not suitable, I will delete it in the next version. Thanks. > >> +{ >> + struct smc_sock *smc = smc_sk(sk); >> + int rc; >> + >> + rc = sock_create_kern(net, family, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP, >> + &smc->clcsock); >> + if (rc) { >> + sk_common_release(sk); >> + return rc; >> + } >> + >> + /* smc_clcsock_release() does not wait smc->clcsock->sk's >> + * destruction; its sk_state might not be TCP_CLOSE after >> + * smc->sk is close()d, and TCP timers can be fired later, >> + * which need net ref. >> + */ >> + sk = smc->clcsock->sk; >> + __netns_tracker_free(net, &sk->ns_tracker, false); >> + sk->sk_net_refcnt = 1; >> + get_net_track(net, &sk->ns_tracker, GFP_KERNEL); >> + sock_inuse_add(net, 1); >> + return 0; >> +} >> + >> static int __smc_create(struct net *net, struct socket *sock, int protocol, >> int kern, struct socket *clcsock) >> { >> @@ -3346,35 +3380,12 @@ static int __smc_create(struct net *net, struct socket *sock, int protocol, >> >> /* create internal TCP socket for CLC handshake and fallback */ >> smc = smc_sk(sk); >> - smc->use_fallback = false; /* assume rdma capability first */ >> - smc->fallback_rsn = 0; >> - >> - /* default behavior from limit_smc_hs in every net namespace */ >> - smc->limit_smc_hs = net->smc.limit_smc_hs; >> >> rc = 0; >> - if (!clcsock) { >> - rc = sock_create_kern(net, family, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP, >> - &smc->clcsock); >> - if (rc) { >> - sk_common_release(sk); >> - goto out; >> - } >> - >> - /* smc_clcsock_release() does not wait smc->clcsock->sk's >> - * destruction; its sk_state might not be TCP_CLOSE after >> - * smc->sk is close()d, and TCP timers can be fired later, >> - * which need net ref. >> - */ >> - sk = smc->clcsock->sk; >> - __netns_tracker_free(net, &sk->ns_tracker, false); >> - sk->sk_net_refcnt = 1; >> - get_net_track(net, &sk->ns_tracker, GFP_KERNEL); >> - sock_inuse_add(net, 1); >> - } else { >> + if (!clcsock) >> + rc = __smc_create_clcsk(net, sk, family); >> + else >> smc->clcsock = clcsock; >> - } >> - >> out: >> return rc; >> } >> -- >> 1.8.3.1 >>