From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stefan Hajnoczi Subject: Re: AF_VSOCK connection refused errno Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 14:58:28 +0000 Message-ID: <20171213145828.GA7173@stefanha-x1.localdomain> References: <20171212155352.GA10090@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <7CCDA4D3-7683-4E5C-95ED-97B2FC9DFF33@vmware.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM" Cc: Dexuan Cui , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: "Jorgen S. Hansen" Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:51028 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750739AbdLMO63 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Dec 2017 09:58:29 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7CCDA4D3-7683-4E5C-95ED-97B2FC9DFF33@vmware.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 10:28:30AM +0000, Jorgen S. Hansen wrote: >=20 > > On Dec 12, 2017, at 4:53 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrot= e: > >=20 > > When connect(2) fails because the peer is not listening the virtio vsock > > transport returns ECONNRESET. I believe the VMCI transport does the > > same (based on code inspection). > >=20 > > Jorgen: Can you confirm this VMCI transport behavior? >=20 > Yes, that is correct. >=20 > > I'd like to change to ECONNREFUSED for all transports because developers > > will be surprised when they get ECONNRESET. It makes porting AF_INET > > code harder. > >=20 > > On the other hand, it may be too late to fix this if there userspace > > applications that rely on ECONNRESET? I'm not aware of any such > > applications myself. >=20 > In the past, I=E2=80=99ve explained to customers that an ECONNRESET error= on connect > can indicate that the peer isn=E2=80=99t listening on the dest address. W= hether they went > and used that information isn=E2=80=99t clear, but changing this behavior= now would > risk breaking applications. While it is unfortunate that we deviate from = INET in > this case, I would prefer it to stay as is. That's fine. Thanks for confirming. Stefan --cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJaMUAUAAoJEJykq7OBq3PIEUoH/jMj45i5W8WCNtandX5yPL3S DAPIlCbSaSB1QvhMNME69wl7QeSUoY1qq++N8QnkwEKyP3cx0fGaT6J1tRBaJHx4 oQaFhvMGfNEQCtmMTSdjcaL9aKfBL9cK/qkJgIH0FPY5BQdfid+EOs54Tp4RjPzi 09r4OBZG11M1BEh2IYdIuUXpQwStIiLM41EnBLXG4qtj1r7/EO/Tj0jbhW+AIo5G 2ceqw5R6A148zHZNNUMriTaqLMgLib3xzlEI491cE5cbpyeALXYPuTaulrXaBdE8 c9pfXBb/ccTWWPBf7E7Q+rhSIFe1mCHhdfRaCQ2EBoHFXZG5U0yyMfXYUOziKkk= =00c3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --cWoXeonUoKmBZSoM--