From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 4BDEF7DA7F; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:36:34 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736217395; cv=none; b=t57vfs2IAIXpIpieqMIJRlFvQoxjDfp29I7AP0BcgubqnQFO4aCoq51NR5pbiHIQABOyVDJ/wZQ8fC/MNZgpCMQseKmsvOZt88QZZBP54xi2wFtSwy7vjcPtOIyr+a07/j2NtST3OZLbJYczyGFfGn0Uk/FRM+l8YcZwYSRq06U= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1736217395; c=relaxed/simple; bh=moqNFwJoVpoEyM0pXq6iiTO5wZQNaHE39lpiW9moPng=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=UH4cmYKLZtLqCK+Y9j+GuNxG6SHe0wOLWrq8drqBviBGG5zUPHJszry4g+gOUxw041Nt0kQqEc7yHLqPRR4ibWcwjsQbhOFTYgDahxzDGMAbmIgiS6hl+ikAmEZtwyIJkKIVeOgmYj3VJHqNDGLK7Yixd5lVbMYfwScuDZiP8qI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=ROEL5mqI; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="ROEL5mqI" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7269AC4CED2; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 02:36:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1736217394; bh=moqNFwJoVpoEyM0pXq6iiTO5wZQNaHE39lpiW9moPng=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=ROEL5mqID/hJH7z7KWNtvY3TAcfQGDFhj9/iQhnWZqpGPBBdIVuDmuyMr1C5KQItF RpDIWQvVV61KP9zX8g6BZofwwTBReUL7JwHt0KgnEPXZK2oPNZ4+OPrK28+VxoWdKX YISzFIEynOqVE5PWUqx4KLMIke30uh15B6DIg4k8vWsxpCyCHdfoFo0BArI4YEhnPR 5rIxJIEAJMv3CSY0l/Vd3KS5vFm8PSv7ntOEUdgFiW8pQTya3CmhBeImicdWgKtWch tAOyLabzDUhifN/hX3MVAodR7cAXV2SBRLYRQjDLj3oTeJviWqrhpvgvhwLloI+T1L 3PCzwriUW8Xjw== Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 18:36:33 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Benjamin Coddington Cc: Boris Pismenny , John Fastabend , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] tls: Fix tls_sw_sendmsg error handling Message-ID: <20250106183633.0ddb7cb0@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <9594185559881679d81f071b181a10eb07cd079f.1736004079.git.bcodding@redhat.com> References: <9594185559881679d81f071b181a10eb07cd079f.1736004079.git.bcodding@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 10:29:45 -0500 Benjamin Coddington wrote: > We've noticed that NFS can hang when using RPC over TLS on an unstable > connection, and investigation shows that the RPC layer is stuck in a tight > loop attempting to transmit, but forever getting -EBADMSG back from the > underlying network. The loop begins when tcp_sendmsg_locked() returns > -EPIPE to tls_tx_records(), but that error is converted to -EBADMSG when > calling the socket's error reporting handler. > > Instead of converting errors from tcp_sendmsg_locked(), let's pass them > along in this path. The RPC layer handles -EPIPE by reconnecting the > transport, which prevents the endless attempts to transmit on a broken > connection. LGTM, only question in my mind is whether we should send this to stable. Any preference?