From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>
Cc: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] net/tls: handle MSG_EOR for tls_device TX flow
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 09:59:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230613095942.2b3063cb@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <acdb1a68-3180-0099-8520-24feb9a71efa@suse.de>
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 10:11:01 +0200 Hannes Reinecke wrote:
> >> + if ((msg->msg_flags & MSG_MORE) &&
> >> + (msg->msg_flags & MSG_EOR))
> >> + return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >
> > EINVAL is more appropriate I think...
> >
> Guess what, that's what I did initially.
> But then when returning EINVAL we would arguably introduce a regression
> (as suddenly we'll be returning a different error code as previously).
> So with this patch we're backwards compatible.
>
> But that's really a quesion for Jakub: what's more appropriate here?
> Return a new error code (which describes the situation better) or stick
> with the original one (and retain compability)?
EINVAL sounds better, EOPNOTSUPP means not implemented yet, once the
thing is implemented it's natural that we'll start returning more
precise error codes.
BTW you need to respin on top of net-next, David's multi-page sendpage
has rejigged this code quite a bit.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-13 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-12 14:38 [PATCHv3 0/4] net/tls: fixes for NVMe-over-TLS Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-12 14:38 ` [PATCH 1/4] net/tls: handle MSG_EOR for tls_sw TX flow Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-12 14:38 ` [PATCH 2/4] net/tls: handle MSG_EOR for tls_device " Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-13 7:58 ` Sagi Grimberg
2023-06-13 8:11 ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-13 16:59 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2023-06-12 14:38 ` [PATCH 3/4] net/tls: implement ->read_sock() Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-12 14:38 ` [PATCH 4/4] selftests/net/tls: add test for MSG_EOR Hannes Reinecke
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2023-06-20 10:28 [PATCHv5 0/4] net/tls: fixes for NVMe-over-TLS Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-20 10:28 ` [PATCH 2/4] net/tls: handle MSG_EOR for tls_device TX flow Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-20 17:12 ` Sabrina Dubroca
2023-06-21 6:09 ` Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-14 6:22 [PATCHv4 0/4] net/tls: fixes for NVMe-over-TLS Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-14 6:22 ` [PATCH 2/4] net/tls: handle MSG_EOR for tls_device TX flow Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-09 12:51 [PATCHv2 0/4] net/tls: fixes for NVMe-over-TLS Hannes Reinecke
2023-06-09 12:51 ` [PATCH 2/4] net/tls: handle MSG_EOR for tls_device TX flow Hannes Reinecke
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=20230613095942.2b3063cb@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=hare@suse.de \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).