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 71AC9311968 for ; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 17:26:51 +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=1782235612; cv=none; b=L4Q9shMxW4spWkoQxW4ToX/RsMCJmR0WVHSLA/0MOnAog24vynXu676JaVSkIubcDDu3FjmcDDoaw7Pr3xd+0Ku+vZ0KrnTSwV3WY30TBWP7IQoLQCuF8jt+v8K3fnrt0ClUuKTRg/Kon0tcqsJVdsSQjLxN4EgNeMBR9LX5njg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782235612; 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=Avc9ijzWoqzM2PqS0GbDYJ/UUbSIL59fsp697I8f8O+jfwzt8Qi1Qd4kRNuin9RSQXtPRYXoia3W5g7mYMa4XyxjYCwIRc7FdAtN4bfHzrfCdPhplvT1kRM6lIfo98bMOyPTJn12oWIg8FCccWo8V7N/plT1H8VXToW0cIBXRfM= 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=D+JFNvJm; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=OrQ4pUnH; 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="D+JFNvJm"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="OrQ4pUnH" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1782235609; 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=D+JFNvJmFgP/BGHMiPta6IPRZyyPgiK8G7eO/02XsFQk7oqEl/+No+H3xwWBf7/73BpIGK 7eswSxdReea//lBT+Zfo30v427C/5qZf9rtMZpI5zN3Wyy3QA1p3VdnsBACqOVSM/StwNx bkOE+fpJPZpVKimrfIiEsVYHVU4MBq4= Received: from mail-wm1-f71.google.com (mail-wm1-f71.google.com [209.85.128.71]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-316-QsQEWE2KPlK9WhQG49FDHw-1; Tue, 23 Jun 2026 13:26:45 -0400 X-MC-Unique: QsQEWE2KPlK9WhQG49FDHw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: QsQEWE2KPlK9WhQG49FDHw_1782235603 Received: by mail-wm1-f71.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-490a767b782so840345e9.2 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=1782235603; x=1782840403; 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=OrQ4pUnHp2YYjc1FdTz+DLqvRxFJ01jcGUSNWcjh+CW5S7E3SyrOMCTOGZtqmrA324 7jdbZ9Olg136ZlaewucoVRRQBy6AJZB4eu8YByQG8hpRinGLR1I1e1CeNMg4kcYndIrR Q+Or4zQPzvjIclxOVRvsACpPRQVBVBtICcx1IHbBVa3YoeNh/DhdBIzN2CecnKaS6tqn C2QJdXeR94c0sxH7cY1E5W++ZxCz3w+SzYu+e+0B5wGnFOKm6M8nGRAY9PSfWMhzNXX/ ACumuXFtdAwcIWexOPj9E176dNnFZvuklReamEy3CHAd71UItcoRb8/kxoG7hkKemJLY nxvg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1782235603; x=1782840403; 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=XQA0AvoFKFmbOgN7fHhoJ+cnuHl723BIYZ+y86cVwFIJd634hggTcbXYNM9T60WIli cR9xn78vsn+1EApPPp0hU0wBMIlbCkVKLgKHP8/mdtV9+YuD/mG8Z2/6FmbKT4BcWA9+ sP1wlMBysp/heNFtzVDiAhKmQjmX5dfX7B+YdI8YSdkjOYgKmNum/u+zkUXJ3tLKko4A mB4mhWCExsNWvTQNsbHsRuOv8i5iGjZ31EKqGt3ImRkDusYlQxNn+QOMk2cKIzm1BIww 2p3Tl/+ErLUDflvy8brcPXnSwxUMTJymct+KN2FSYjfImuIPT0A9c5rIFWjnyjhvcK1O +ZFg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AFNElJ/NuKwbln2usHNgwceGSp/PXUPU68TQnPGtaZXNdvmSFSNUl1MFvcL03TgaCXZBIjmK1RXGe4DJ5Nb5vYo=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyUzElAGp0MZTiiAv8m65+h9Xy76y3s0MSiGCVm65N3IdQ+gxsu KQ0kHjAyqDmb2jb23h3lFCf8SwVfYUdB/G4XD1ypejjNr/ks0Tgp1uhI+gtK8coROCcJwq+jjhA G9HB9YfMKuSxweyPmGtodxrbz2MSWDqoRNyZCcPtXuCN5bgsnwSiuEhHi118XE9mgwA== X-Gm-Gg: AfdE7cn665PISZcmNW9m65NipqgPwiR3v34klUqwi5X1UvXqEXFhL2wvCRgEKJr2j1X Wke9oWJRi2U11dzNSODwDVbAwo+6NjAjKO8LWtKPFag+s4e7h4Bbe7RpmSvEWcezar689FgN3oy Z+SapH1lgyaamI0vlw6sGc5RWgNmbmX+FuXbilB9PAJq1VeqElBbWwKdwBizHza7Q05ESGbLb5U 9ngofV5DvcQzNHhPUdb/iBeHlULA/MKhauwc+PskoPcop79fH0TkqWi8ZKtN2DjHuM3gbfIv5Ha ia6J6KXzEqxOjAAl59x/1sPLOaHuxV88+PSro1IXCfnf/A9oIRTiksKtJuanZTKokjCg75qcPMK n3sEB4OKo9LYaa7ynLKt0VCr9qxNecdZw X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:d4:b0:488:ac01:72de with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-49240e20de0mr257222795e9.5.1782235603239; 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: linux-kernel@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