From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=f3Oa=RB=vger.kernel.org=netdev-owner@kernel.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on
	aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,
	MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.0
Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99])
	by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4BDEC43381
	for <netdev@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 19:03:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67])
	by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA47B21852
	for <netdev@archiver.kernel.org>; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 19:03:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1728658AbfBZTDT (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@archiver.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 26 Feb 2019 14:03:19 -0500
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:37830 "EHLO
        ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1727108AbfBZTDT (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Tue, 26 Feb 2019 14:03:19 -0500
Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux))
        id 1gyi0a-0000DF-A1; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 19:03:16 +0000
Date:   Tue, 26 Feb 2019 19:03:16 +0000
From:   Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To:     Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@talktalk.net>
Cc:     Jason Baron <jbaron@akamai.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] nasty corner case in unix_dgram_sendmsg()
Message-ID: <20190226190316.GJ2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <20190225035121.GH2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20190226062817.GA17962@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <20190226063804.GI2217@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
 <878sy2k1m3.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <878sy2k1m3.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 03:31:32PM +0000, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
> Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> writes:
> > On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 06:28:17AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
> 
> >> 	* if after relocking we see that unix_peer(sk) now
> >> is equal to other, we arrange for wakeup forwarding from other's
> >> peer_wait *and* if that has (likely) succeeded we fail with -EAGAIN.
> >> Huh?
> 
> This returns 1 if sending isn't possible at the moment, ie, if the
> process which tries to send has to wait.

Except that in _this_ case we won't be waiting at all - we'll just
return -EAGAIN (as one could expect, what with no timeout given/left).
So what's the point of forwarding wakeups?  IOW, what is it that we
expect to be waiting on sk_sleep(sk)?  Note that it won't be this
call of sendmsg(2) (it'll bugger off without any further waiting).
It won't be subsequent calls of sendmsg(2) either - they either
sleep on skb allocation (which has nothing to do with destination)
_or_ they sleep directly on other->peer_wait.  And poll(), while it
will be sleeping on sk_sleep(sk), will make sure to set the forwarding 
up.

I understand what the unix_dgram_peer_wake_me() is doing; I understand
what unix_dgram_poll() is using it for.  What I do not understand is
what's the point of doing that in unix_dgram_sendmsg()...