* [PATCH net-next v5 1/5] vsock/virtio: Linger on unsent data
2025-05-20 22:55 [PATCH net-next v5 0/5] vsock: SOCK_LINGER rework Michal Luczaj
@ 2025-05-20 22:55 ` Michal Luczaj
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 2/5] vsock: Move lingering logic to af_vsock core Michal Luczaj
` (3 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Luczaj @ 2025-05-20 22:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Garzarella, David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski,
Paolo Abeni, Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang,
Xuan Zhuo, Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi
Cc: virtualization, netdev, linux-kernel, kvm, Michal Luczaj
Currently vsock's lingering effectively boils down to waiting (or timing
out) until packets are consumed or dropped by the peer; be it by receiving
the data, closing or shutting down the connection.
To align with the semantics described in the SO_LINGER section of man
socket(7) and to mimic AF_INET's behaviour more closely, change the logic
of a lingering close(): instead of waiting for all data to be handled,
block until data is considered sent from the vsock's transport point of
view. That is until worker picks the packets for processing and decrements
virtio_vsock_sock::bytes_unsent down to 0.
Note that (some interpretation of) lingering was always limited to
transports that called virtio_transport_wait_close() on transport release.
This does not change, i.e. under Hyper-V and VMCI no lingering would be
observed.
The implementation does not adhere strictly to man page's interpretation of
SO_LINGER: shutdown() will not trigger the lingering. This follows AF_INET.
Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
---
net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
index 6e7b727c781c88674c147b7b75f49f4f1c670d38..f2f1b166731b1bf2baa3db2854de19aa331128ea 100644
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
@@ -1195,12 +1195,14 @@ static void virtio_transport_wait_close(struct sock *sk, long timeout)
{
if (timeout) {
DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC(wait, woken_wake_function);
+ struct vsock_sock *vsk = vsock_sk(sk);
add_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
do {
if (sk_wait_event(sk, &timeout,
- sock_flag(sk, SOCK_DONE), &wait))
+ virtio_transport_unsent_bytes(vsk) == 0,
+ &wait))
break;
} while (!signal_pending(current) && timeout);
--
2.49.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* [PATCH net-next v5 2/5] vsock: Move lingering logic to af_vsock core
2025-05-20 22:55 [PATCH net-next v5 0/5] vsock: SOCK_LINGER rework Michal Luczaj
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 1/5] vsock/virtio: Linger on unsent data Michal Luczaj
@ 2025-05-20 22:55 ` Michal Luczaj
2025-05-21 14:37 ` Stefano Garzarella
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] vsock/test: Introduce vsock_wait_sent() helper Michal Luczaj
` (2 subsequent siblings)
4 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Luczaj @ 2025-05-20 22:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Garzarella, David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski,
Paolo Abeni, Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang,
Xuan Zhuo, Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi
Cc: virtualization, netdev, linux-kernel, kvm, Michal Luczaj
Lingering should be transport-independent in the long run. In preparation
for supporting other transports, as well as the linger on shutdown(), move
code to core.
Generalize by querying vsock_transport::unsent_bytes(), guard against the
callback being unimplemented. Do not pass sk_lingertime explicitly. Pull
SOCK_LINGER check into vsock_linger().
Flatten the function. Remove the nested block by inverting the condition:
return early on !timeout.
Suggested-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
---
include/net/af_vsock.h | 1 +
net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 23 ++---------------------
3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/net/af_vsock.h b/include/net/af_vsock.h
index 9e85424c834353d016a527070dd62e15ff3bfce1..d56e6e135158939087d060dfcf65d3fdaea53bf3 100644
--- a/include/net/af_vsock.h
+++ b/include/net/af_vsock.h
@@ -221,6 +221,7 @@ void vsock_for_each_connected_socket(struct vsock_transport *transport,
void (*fn)(struct sock *sk));
int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk);
bool vsock_find_cid(unsigned int cid);
+void vsock_linger(struct sock *sk);
/**** TAP ****/
diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
index fc6afbc8d6806a4d98c66abc3af4bd139c583b08..2e7a3034e965db30b6ee295370d866e6d8b1c341 100644
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
@@ -1013,6 +1013,39 @@ static int vsock_getname(struct socket *sock,
return err;
}
+void vsock_linger(struct sock *sk)
+{
+ DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC(wait, woken_wake_function);
+ ssize_t (*unsent)(struct vsock_sock *vsk);
+ struct vsock_sock *vsk = vsock_sk(sk);
+ long timeout;
+
+ if (!sock_flag(sk, SOCK_LINGER))
+ return;
+
+ timeout = sk->sk_lingertime;
+ if (!timeout)
+ return;
+
+ /* Transports must implement `unsent_bytes` if they want to support
+ * SOCK_LINGER through `vsock_linger()` since we use it to check when
+ * the socket can be closed.
+ */
+ unsent = vsk->transport->unsent_bytes;
+ if (!unsent)
+ return;
+
+ add_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
+
+ do {
+ if (sk_wait_event(sk, &timeout, unsent(vsk) == 0, &wait))
+ break;
+ } while (!signal_pending(current) && timeout);
+
+ remove_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vsock_linger);
+
static int vsock_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int mode)
{
int err;
diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
index f2f1b166731b1bf2baa3db2854de19aa331128ea..7897fd970dd867bd2c97a2147e3a5c853fb514af 100644
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
@@ -1191,25 +1191,6 @@ static void virtio_transport_remove_sock(struct vsock_sock *vsk)
vsock_remove_sock(vsk);
}
-static void virtio_transport_wait_close(struct sock *sk, long timeout)
-{
- if (timeout) {
- DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC(wait, woken_wake_function);
- struct vsock_sock *vsk = vsock_sk(sk);
-
- add_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
-
- do {
- if (sk_wait_event(sk, &timeout,
- virtio_transport_unsent_bytes(vsk) == 0,
- &wait))
- break;
- } while (!signal_pending(current) && timeout);
-
- remove_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
- }
-}
-
static void virtio_transport_cancel_close_work(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
bool cancel_timeout)
{
@@ -1279,8 +1260,8 @@ static bool virtio_transport_close(struct vsock_sock *vsk)
if ((sk->sk_shutdown & SHUTDOWN_MASK) != SHUTDOWN_MASK)
(void)virtio_transport_shutdown(vsk, SHUTDOWN_MASK);
- if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_LINGER) && !(current->flags & PF_EXITING))
- virtio_transport_wait_close(sk, sk->sk_lingertime);
+ if (!(current->flags & PF_EXITING))
+ vsock_linger(sk);
if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_DONE)) {
return true;
--
2.49.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net-next v5 2/5] vsock: Move lingering logic to af_vsock core
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 2/5] vsock: Move lingering logic to af_vsock core Michal Luczaj
@ 2025-05-21 14:37 ` Stefano Garzarella
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Garzarella @ 2025-05-21 14:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Luczaj
Cc: David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni,
Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang, Xuan Zhuo,
Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi, virtualization, netdev,
linux-kernel, kvm
On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:55:20AM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>Lingering should be transport-independent in the long run. In preparation
>for supporting other transports, as well as the linger on shutdown(), move
>code to core.
>
>Generalize by querying vsock_transport::unsent_bytes(), guard against the
>callback being unimplemented. Do not pass sk_lingertime explicitly. Pull
>SOCK_LINGER check into vsock_linger().
>
>Flatten the function. Remove the nested block by inverting the condition:
>return early on !timeout.
>
>Suggested-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
>Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
>---
> include/net/af_vsock.h | 1 +
> net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 23 ++---------------------
> 3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
LGTM!
Reviewed-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
>
>diff --git a/include/net/af_vsock.h b/include/net/af_vsock.h
>index 9e85424c834353d016a527070dd62e15ff3bfce1..d56e6e135158939087d060dfcf65d3fdaea53bf3 100644
>--- a/include/net/af_vsock.h
>+++ b/include/net/af_vsock.h
>@@ -221,6 +221,7 @@ void vsock_for_each_connected_socket(struct vsock_transport *transport,
> void (*fn)(struct sock *sk));
> int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk);
> bool vsock_find_cid(unsigned int cid);
>+void vsock_linger(struct sock *sk);
>
> /**** TAP ****/
>
>diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
>index fc6afbc8d6806a4d98c66abc3af4bd139c583b08..2e7a3034e965db30b6ee295370d866e6d8b1c341 100644
>--- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
>+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c
>@@ -1013,6 +1013,39 @@ static int vsock_getname(struct socket *sock,
> return err;
> }
>
>+void vsock_linger(struct sock *sk)
>+{
>+ DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC(wait, woken_wake_function);
>+ ssize_t (*unsent)(struct vsock_sock *vsk);
>+ struct vsock_sock *vsk = vsock_sk(sk);
>+ long timeout;
>+
>+ if (!sock_flag(sk, SOCK_LINGER))
>+ return;
>+
>+ timeout = sk->sk_lingertime;
>+ if (!timeout)
>+ return;
>+
>+ /* Transports must implement `unsent_bytes` if they want to support
>+ * SOCK_LINGER through `vsock_linger()` since we use it to check when
>+ * the socket can be closed.
>+ */
>+ unsent = vsk->transport->unsent_bytes;
>+ if (!unsent)
>+ return;
>+
>+ add_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
>+
>+ do {
>+ if (sk_wait_event(sk, &timeout, unsent(vsk) == 0, &wait))
>+ break;
>+ } while (!signal_pending(current) && timeout);
>+
>+ remove_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
>+}
>+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vsock_linger);
>+
> static int vsock_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int mode)
> {
> int err;
>diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>index f2f1b166731b1bf2baa3db2854de19aa331128ea..7897fd970dd867bd2c97a2147e3a5c853fb514af 100644
>--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>@@ -1191,25 +1191,6 @@ static void virtio_transport_remove_sock(struct vsock_sock *vsk)
> vsock_remove_sock(vsk);
> }
>
>-static void virtio_transport_wait_close(struct sock *sk, long timeout)
>-{
>- if (timeout) {
>- DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC(wait, woken_wake_function);
>- struct vsock_sock *vsk = vsock_sk(sk);
>-
>- add_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
>-
>- do {
>- if (sk_wait_event(sk, &timeout,
>- virtio_transport_unsent_bytes(vsk) == 0,
>- &wait))
>- break;
>- } while (!signal_pending(current) && timeout);
>-
>- remove_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
>- }
>-}
>-
> static void virtio_transport_cancel_close_work(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
> bool cancel_timeout)
> {
>@@ -1279,8 +1260,8 @@ static bool virtio_transport_close(struct vsock_sock *vsk)
> if ((sk->sk_shutdown & SHUTDOWN_MASK) != SHUTDOWN_MASK)
> (void)virtio_transport_shutdown(vsk, SHUTDOWN_MASK);
>
>- if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_LINGER) && !(current->flags & PF_EXITING))
>- virtio_transport_wait_close(sk, sk->sk_lingertime);
>+ if (!(current->flags & PF_EXITING))
>+ vsock_linger(sk);
>
> if (sock_flag(sk, SOCK_DONE)) {
> return true;
>
>--
>2.49.0
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] vsock/test: Introduce vsock_wait_sent() helper
2025-05-20 22:55 [PATCH net-next v5 0/5] vsock: SOCK_LINGER rework Michal Luczaj
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 1/5] vsock/virtio: Linger on unsent data Michal Luczaj
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 2/5] vsock: Move lingering logic to af_vsock core Michal Luczaj
@ 2025-05-20 22:55 ` Michal Luczaj
2025-05-21 15:01 ` Stefano Garzarella
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 4/5] vsock/test: Introduce enable_so_linger() helper Michal Luczaj
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 5/5] vsock/test: Add test for an unexpectedly lingering close() Michal Luczaj
4 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Luczaj @ 2025-05-20 22:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Garzarella, David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski,
Paolo Abeni, Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang,
Xuan Zhuo, Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi
Cc: virtualization, netdev, linux-kernel, kvm, Michal Luczaj
Distill the virtio_vsock_sock::bytes_unsent checking loop (ioctl SIOCOUTQ)
and move it to utils. Tweak the comment.
Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
---
tools/testing/vsock/util.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
tools/testing/vsock/util.h | 1 +
tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 23 ++++++-----------------
3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
index de25892f865f07672da0886be8bd1a429ade8b05..120277be14ab2f58e0350adcdd56fc18861399c9 100644
--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
#include <assert.h>
#include <sys/epoll.h>
#include <sys/mman.h>
+#include <linux/sockios.h>
#include "timeout.h"
#include "control.h"
@@ -96,6 +97,30 @@ void vsock_wait_remote_close(int fd)
close(epollfd);
}
+/* Wait until transport reports no data left to be sent.
+ * Return non-zero if transport does not implement the unsent_bytes() callback.
+ */
+int vsock_wait_sent(int fd)
+{
+ int ret, sock_bytes_unsent;
+
+ timeout_begin(TIMEOUT);
+ do {
+ ret = ioctl(fd, SIOCOUTQ, &sock_bytes_unsent);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ if (errno == EOPNOTSUPP)
+ break;
+
+ perror("ioctl(SIOCOUTQ)");
+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
+ }
+ timeout_check("SIOCOUTQ");
+ } while (sock_bytes_unsent != 0);
+ timeout_end();
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
/* Create socket <type>, bind to <cid, port> and return the file descriptor. */
int vsock_bind(unsigned int cid, unsigned int port, int type)
{
diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
index d1f765ce3eeeed8f738630846bb47c4f3f6f946f..e307f0d4f6940e984b84a95fd0d57598e7c4e35f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
@@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ int vsock_stream_listen(unsigned int cid, unsigned int port);
int vsock_seqpacket_accept(unsigned int cid, unsigned int port,
struct sockaddr_vm *clientaddrp);
void vsock_wait_remote_close(int fd);
+int vsock_wait_sent(int fd);
void send_buf(int fd, const void *buf, size_t len, int flags,
ssize_t expected_ret);
void recv_buf(int fd, void *buf, size_t len, int flags, ssize_t expected_ret);
diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
index 9ea33b78b9fcb532f4f9616b38b4d2b627b04d31..4c2c94151070d54d1ed6e6af5a6de0b262a0206e 100644
--- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
@@ -21,7 +21,6 @@
#include <poll.h>
#include <signal.h>
#include <sys/ioctl.h>
-#include <linux/sockios.h>
#include <linux/time64.h>
#include "vsock_test_zerocopy.h"
@@ -1280,7 +1279,7 @@ static void test_unsent_bytes_server(const struct test_opts *opts, int type)
static void test_unsent_bytes_client(const struct test_opts *opts, int type)
{
unsigned char buf[MSG_BUF_IOCTL_LEN];
- int ret, fd, sock_bytes_unsent;
+ int fd;
fd = vsock_connect(opts->peer_cid, opts->peer_port, type);
if (fd < 0) {
@@ -1297,22 +1296,12 @@ static void test_unsent_bytes_client(const struct test_opts *opts, int type)
/* SIOCOUTQ isn't guaranteed to instantly track sent data. Even though
* the "RECEIVED" message means that the other side has received the
* data, there can be a delay in our kernel before updating the "unsent
- * bytes" counter. Repeat SIOCOUTQ until it returns 0.
+ * bytes" counter. vsock_wait_sent() will repeat SIOCOUTQ until it
+ * returns 0.
*/
- timeout_begin(TIMEOUT);
- do {
- ret = ioctl(fd, SIOCOUTQ, &sock_bytes_unsent);
- if (ret < 0) {
- if (errno == EOPNOTSUPP) {
- fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
- break;
- }
- perror("ioctl");
- exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
- }
- timeout_check("SIOCOUTQ");
- } while (sock_bytes_unsent != 0);
- timeout_end();
+ if (vsock_wait_sent(fd))
+ fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
+
close(fd);
}
--
2.49.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] vsock/test: Introduce vsock_wait_sent() helper
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] vsock/test: Introduce vsock_wait_sent() helper Michal Luczaj
@ 2025-05-21 15:01 ` Stefano Garzarella
2025-05-21 23:06 ` Michal Luczaj
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Garzarella @ 2025-05-21 15:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Luczaj
Cc: David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni,
Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang, Xuan Zhuo,
Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi, virtualization, netdev,
linux-kernel, kvm
On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:55:21AM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>Distill the virtio_vsock_sock::bytes_unsent checking loop (ioctl SIOCOUTQ)
>and move it to utils. Tweak the comment.
>
>Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
>---
> tools/testing/vsock/util.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> tools/testing/vsock/util.h | 1 +
> tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 23 ++++++-----------------
> 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
>index de25892f865f07672da0886be8bd1a429ade8b05..120277be14ab2f58e0350adcdd56fc18861399c9 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
>@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
> #include <assert.h>
> #include <sys/epoll.h>
> #include <sys/mman.h>
>+#include <linux/sockios.h>
>
> #include "timeout.h"
> #include "control.h"
>@@ -96,6 +97,30 @@ void vsock_wait_remote_close(int fd)
> close(epollfd);
> }
>
>+/* Wait until transport reports no data left to be sent.
>+ * Return non-zero if transport does not implement the unsent_bytes() callback.
>+ */
>+int vsock_wait_sent(int fd)
nit: I just see we use `bool` in the test to store the result of this
function, so maybe we can return `bool` directl from here...
(not a strong opinion, it's fine also this).
Thanks,
Stefano
>+{
>+ int ret, sock_bytes_unsent;
>+
>+ timeout_begin(TIMEOUT);
>+ do {
>+ ret = ioctl(fd, SIOCOUTQ, &sock_bytes_unsent);
>+ if (ret < 0) {
>+ if (errno == EOPNOTSUPP)
>+ break;
>+
>+ perror("ioctl(SIOCOUTQ)");
>+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>+ }
>+ timeout_check("SIOCOUTQ");
>+ } while (sock_bytes_unsent != 0);
>+ timeout_end();
>+
>+ return ret;
>+}
>+
> /* Create socket <type>, bind to <cid, port> and return the file descriptor. */
> int vsock_bind(unsigned int cid, unsigned int port, int type)
> {
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
>index d1f765ce3eeeed8f738630846bb47c4f3f6f946f..e307f0d4f6940e984b84a95fd0d57598e7c4e35f 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
>@@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ int vsock_stream_listen(unsigned int cid, unsigned int port);
> int vsock_seqpacket_accept(unsigned int cid, unsigned int port,
> struct sockaddr_vm *clientaddrp);
> void vsock_wait_remote_close(int fd);
>+int vsock_wait_sent(int fd);
> void send_buf(int fd, const void *buf, size_t len, int flags,
> ssize_t expected_ret);
> void recv_buf(int fd, void *buf, size_t len, int flags, ssize_t expected_ret);
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>index 9ea33b78b9fcb532f4f9616b38b4d2b627b04d31..4c2c94151070d54d1ed6e6af5a6de0b262a0206e 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>@@ -21,7 +21,6 @@
> #include <poll.h>
> #include <signal.h>
> #include <sys/ioctl.h>
>-#include <linux/sockios.h>
> #include <linux/time64.h>
>
> #include "vsock_test_zerocopy.h"
>@@ -1280,7 +1279,7 @@ static void test_unsent_bytes_server(const struct test_opts *opts, int type)
> static void test_unsent_bytes_client(const struct test_opts *opts, int type)
> {
> unsigned char buf[MSG_BUF_IOCTL_LEN];
>- int ret, fd, sock_bytes_unsent;
>+ int fd;
>
> fd = vsock_connect(opts->peer_cid, opts->peer_port, type);
> if (fd < 0) {
>@@ -1297,22 +1296,12 @@ static void test_unsent_bytes_client(const struct test_opts *opts, int type)
> /* SIOCOUTQ isn't guaranteed to instantly track sent data. Even though
> * the "RECEIVED" message means that the other side has received the
> * data, there can be a delay in our kernel before updating the "unsent
>- * bytes" counter. Repeat SIOCOUTQ until it returns 0.
>+ * bytes" counter. vsock_wait_sent() will repeat SIOCOUTQ until it
>+ * returns 0.
> */
>- timeout_begin(TIMEOUT);
>- do {
>- ret = ioctl(fd, SIOCOUTQ, &sock_bytes_unsent);
>- if (ret < 0) {
>- if (errno == EOPNOTSUPP) {
>- fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
>- break;
>- }
>- perror("ioctl");
>- exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>- }
>- timeout_check("SIOCOUTQ");
>- } while (sock_bytes_unsent != 0);
>- timeout_end();
>+ if (vsock_wait_sent(fd))
>+ fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
>+
> close(fd);
> }
>
>
>--
>2.49.0
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] vsock/test: Introduce vsock_wait_sent() helper
2025-05-21 15:01 ` Stefano Garzarella
@ 2025-05-21 23:06 ` Michal Luczaj
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Luczaj @ 2025-05-21 23:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Garzarella
Cc: David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni,
Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang, Xuan Zhuo,
Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi, virtualization, netdev,
linux-kernel, kvm
On 5/21/25 17:01, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:55:21AM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>> ...
>> +/* Wait until transport reports no data left to be sent.
>> + * Return non-zero if transport does not implement the unsent_bytes() callback.
>> + */
>> +int vsock_wait_sent(int fd)
>
> nit: I just see we use `bool` in the test to store the result of this
> function, so maybe we can return `bool` directl from here...
>
> (not a strong opinion, it's fine also this).
Yeah, why not, let's do bool.
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [PATCH net-next v5 4/5] vsock/test: Introduce enable_so_linger() helper
2025-05-20 22:55 [PATCH net-next v5 0/5] vsock: SOCK_LINGER rework Michal Luczaj
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] vsock/test: Introduce vsock_wait_sent() helper Michal Luczaj
@ 2025-05-20 22:55 ` Michal Luczaj
2025-05-21 14:41 ` Stefano Garzarella
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 5/5] vsock/test: Add test for an unexpectedly lingering close() Michal Luczaj
4 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Luczaj @ 2025-05-20 22:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Garzarella, David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski,
Paolo Abeni, Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang,
Xuan Zhuo, Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi
Cc: virtualization, netdev, linux-kernel, kvm, Michal Luczaj
Add a helper function that sets SO_LINGER. Adapt the caller.
Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
---
tools/testing/vsock/util.c | 13 +++++++++++++
tools/testing/vsock/util.h | 4 ++++
tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 10 +---------
3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
index 120277be14ab2f58e0350adcdd56fc18861399c9..41b47f7deadcda68fddc2b22a6d9bb7847cc0a14 100644
--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
@@ -823,3 +823,16 @@ void enable_so_zerocopy_check(int fd)
setsockopt_int_check(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_ZEROCOPY, 1,
"setsockopt SO_ZEROCOPY");
}
+
+void enable_so_linger(int fd)
+{
+ struct linger optval = {
+ .l_onoff = 1,
+ .l_linger = LINGER_TIMEOUT
+ };
+
+ if (setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_LINGER, &optval, sizeof(optval))) {
+ perror("setsockopt(SO_LINGER)");
+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
+ }
+}
diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
index e307f0d4f6940e984b84a95fd0d57598e7c4e35f..1b3d8eb2c4b3c41c9007584177455c4fa442334c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
@@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ enum test_mode {
#define DEFAULT_PEER_PORT 1234
+/* Half of the default to not risk timing out the control channel */
+#define LINGER_TIMEOUT (TIMEOUT / 2)
+
/* Test runner options */
struct test_opts {
enum test_mode mode;
@@ -80,4 +83,5 @@ void setsockopt_int_check(int fd, int level, int optname, int val,
void setsockopt_timeval_check(int fd, int level, int optname,
struct timeval val, char const *errmsg);
void enable_so_zerocopy_check(int fd);
+void enable_so_linger(int fd);
#endif /* UTIL_H */
diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
index 4c2c94151070d54d1ed6e6af5a6de0b262a0206e..f401c6a79495bc7fda97012e5bfeabec7dbfb60a 100644
--- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
@@ -1813,10 +1813,6 @@ static void test_stream_connect_retry_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
static void test_stream_linger_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
{
- struct linger optval = {
- .l_onoff = 1,
- .l_linger = 1
- };
int fd;
fd = vsock_stream_connect(opts->peer_cid, opts->peer_port);
@@ -1825,11 +1821,7 @@ static void test_stream_linger_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
- if (setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_LINGER, &optval, sizeof(optval))) {
- perror("setsockopt(SO_LINGER)");
- exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
- }
-
+ enable_so_linger(fd);
close(fd);
}
--
2.49.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net-next v5 4/5] vsock/test: Introduce enable_so_linger() helper
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 4/5] vsock/test: Introduce enable_so_linger() helper Michal Luczaj
@ 2025-05-21 14:41 ` Stefano Garzarella
2025-05-21 23:08 ` Michal Luczaj
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Garzarella @ 2025-05-21 14:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Luczaj
Cc: David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni,
Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang, Xuan Zhuo,
Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi, virtualization, netdev,
linux-kernel, kvm
On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:55:22AM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>Add a helper function that sets SO_LINGER. Adapt the caller.
>
>Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
>---
> tools/testing/vsock/util.c | 13 +++++++++++++
> tools/testing/vsock/util.h | 4 ++++
> tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 10 +---------
> 3 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
>index 120277be14ab2f58e0350adcdd56fc18861399c9..41b47f7deadcda68fddc2b22a6d9bb7847cc0a14 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
>@@ -823,3 +823,16 @@ void enable_so_zerocopy_check(int fd)
> setsockopt_int_check(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_ZEROCOPY, 1,
> "setsockopt SO_ZEROCOPY");
> }
>+
>+void enable_so_linger(int fd)
>+{
>+ struct linger optval = {
>+ .l_onoff = 1,
>+ .l_linger = LINGER_TIMEOUT
>+ };
>+
>+ if (setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_LINGER, &optval, sizeof(optval))) {
>+ perror("setsockopt(SO_LINGER)");
>+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>+ }
>+}
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
>index e307f0d4f6940e984b84a95fd0d57598e7c4e35f..1b3d8eb2c4b3c41c9007584177455c4fa442334c 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
>@@ -14,6 +14,9 @@ enum test_mode {
>
> #define DEFAULT_PEER_PORT 1234
>
>+/* Half of the default to not risk timing out the control channel */
>+#define LINGER_TIMEOUT (TIMEOUT / 2)
>+
> /* Test runner options */
> struct test_opts {
> enum test_mode mode;
>@@ -80,4 +83,5 @@ void setsockopt_int_check(int fd, int level, int optname, int val,
> void setsockopt_timeval_check(int fd, int level, int optname,
> struct timeval val, char const *errmsg);
> void enable_so_zerocopy_check(int fd);
>+void enable_so_linger(int fd);
> #endif /* UTIL_H */
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>index 4c2c94151070d54d1ed6e6af5a6de0b262a0206e..f401c6a79495bc7fda97012e5bfeabec7dbfb60a 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>@@ -1813,10 +1813,6 @@ static void test_stream_connect_retry_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
>
> static void test_stream_linger_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
> {
>- struct linger optval = {
>- .l_onoff = 1,
>- .l_linger = 1
So, we are changing the timeout from 1 to 5, right?
Should we mention in the commit description?
>- };
> int fd;
>
> fd = vsock_stream_connect(opts->peer_cid, opts->peer_port);
>@@ -1825,11 +1821,7 @@ static void test_stream_linger_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
> exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
> }
>
>- if (setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_LINGER, &optval, sizeof(optval))) {
>- perror("setsockopt(SO_LINGER)");
>- exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>- }
>-
>+ enable_so_linger(fd);
If you need to resend, I'd pass the timeout as parameter, so the test
can use whatever they want.
The rest LGTM.
Thanks,
Stefano
> close(fd);
> }
>
>
>--
>2.49.0
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net-next v5 4/5] vsock/test: Introduce enable_so_linger() helper
2025-05-21 14:41 ` Stefano Garzarella
@ 2025-05-21 23:08 ` Michal Luczaj
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Luczaj @ 2025-05-21 23:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Garzarella
Cc: David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni,
Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang, Xuan Zhuo,
Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi, virtualization, netdev,
linux-kernel, kvm
On 5/21/25 16:41, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:55:22AM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>> ...
>> static void test_stream_linger_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
>> {
>> - struct linger optval = {
>> - .l_onoff = 1,
>> - .l_linger = 1
>
> So, we are changing the timeout from 1 to 5, right?
> Should we mention in the commit description?
Yup, we do, but the value (as long as it's positive) is meaningless in the
context of this test. That's way I didn't bother. But since
enable_so_linger() is gaining @timeout, I'll pass the original `1` to keep
things as they are.
Thanks,
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* [PATCH net-next v5 5/5] vsock/test: Add test for an unexpectedly lingering close()
2025-05-20 22:55 [PATCH net-next v5 0/5] vsock: SOCK_LINGER rework Michal Luczaj
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 4/5] vsock/test: Introduce enable_so_linger() helper Michal Luczaj
@ 2025-05-20 22:55 ` Michal Luczaj
2025-05-21 14:56 ` Stefano Garzarella
4 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Luczaj @ 2025-05-20 22:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Garzarella, David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski,
Paolo Abeni, Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang,
Xuan Zhuo, Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi
Cc: virtualization, netdev, linux-kernel, kvm, Michal Luczaj
There was an issue with SO_LINGER: instead of blocking until all queued
messages for the socket have been successfully sent (or the linger timeout
has been reached), close() would block until packets were handled by the
peer.
Add a test to alert on close() lingering when it should not.
Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
---
tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
index f401c6a79495bc7fda97012e5bfeabec7dbfb60a..1040503333cf315e52592c876f2c1809b36fdfdb 100644
--- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
@@ -1839,6 +1839,50 @@ static void test_stream_linger_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
close(fd);
}
+static void test_stream_nolinger_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
+{
+ bool nowait;
+ time_t ns;
+ int fd;
+
+ fd = vsock_stream_connect(opts->peer_cid, opts->peer_port);
+ if (fd < 0) {
+ perror("connect");
+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
+ }
+
+ enable_so_linger(fd);
+ send_byte(fd, 1, 0); /* Left unread to expose incorrect behaviour. */
+ nowait = vsock_wait_sent(fd);
+
+ ns = current_nsec();
+ close(fd);
+ ns = current_nsec() - ns;
+
+ if (nowait) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
+ } else if ((ns + NSEC_PER_SEC - 1) / NSEC_PER_SEC >= LINGER_TIMEOUT) {
+ fprintf(stderr, "Unexpected lingering\n");
+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
+ }
+
+ control_writeln("DONE");
+}
+
+static void test_stream_nolinger_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
+{
+ int fd;
+
+ fd = vsock_stream_accept(VMADDR_CID_ANY, opts->peer_port, NULL);
+ if (fd < 0) {
+ perror("accept");
+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
+ }
+
+ control_expectln("DONE");
+ close(fd);
+}
+
static struct test_case test_cases[] = {
{
.name = "SOCK_STREAM connection reset",
@@ -1999,6 +2043,11 @@ static struct test_case test_cases[] = {
.run_client = test_stream_linger_client,
.run_server = test_stream_linger_server,
},
+ {
+ .name = "SOCK_STREAM SO_LINGER close() on unread",
+ .run_client = test_stream_nolinger_client,
+ .run_server = test_stream_nolinger_server,
+ },
{},
};
--
2.49.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net-next v5 5/5] vsock/test: Add test for an unexpectedly lingering close()
2025-05-20 22:55 ` [PATCH net-next v5 5/5] vsock/test: Add test for an unexpectedly lingering close() Michal Luczaj
@ 2025-05-21 14:56 ` Stefano Garzarella
2025-05-21 23:17 ` Michal Luczaj
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Stefano Garzarella @ 2025-05-21 14:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michal Luczaj
Cc: David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni,
Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang, Xuan Zhuo,
Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi, virtualization, netdev,
linux-kernel, kvm
On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:55:23AM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>There was an issue with SO_LINGER: instead of blocking until all queued
>messages for the socket have been successfully sent (or the linger timeout
>has been reached), close() would block until packets were handled by the
>peer.
>
>Add a test to alert on close() lingering when it should not.
>
>Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
>---
> tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
>
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>index f401c6a79495bc7fda97012e5bfeabec7dbfb60a..1040503333cf315e52592c876f2c1809b36fdfdb 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>@@ -1839,6 +1839,50 @@ static void test_stream_linger_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
> close(fd);
> }
>
>+static void test_stream_nolinger_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
>+{
>+ bool nowait;
>+ time_t ns;
>+ int fd;
>+
>+ fd = vsock_stream_connect(opts->peer_cid, opts->peer_port);
>+ if (fd < 0) {
>+ perror("connect");
>+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>+ }
>+
>+ enable_so_linger(fd);
If we use a parameter for the linger timeout, IMO will be easy to
understand this test, defining the timeout in this test, set it and
check the value, without defining LINGER_TIMEOUT in util.h.
>+ send_byte(fd, 1, 0); /* Left unread to expose incorrect behaviour. */
>+ nowait = vsock_wait_sent(fd);
>+
>+ ns = current_nsec();
>+ close(fd);
>+ ns = current_nsec() - ns;
>+
>+ if (nowait) {
>+ fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
>+ } else if ((ns + NSEC_PER_SEC - 1) / NSEC_PER_SEC >= LINGER_TIMEOUT) {
Should we define a macro for this conversion?
Or just use DIV_ROUND_UP:
--- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
@@ -1831,7 +1831,7 @@ static void test_stream_nolinger_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
if (nowait) {
fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
- } else if ((ns + NSEC_PER_SEC - 1) / NSEC_PER_SEC >= LINGER_TIMEOUT) {
+ } else if (DIV_ROUND_UP(ns, NSEC_PER_SEC) >= LINGER_TIMEOUT) {
fprintf(stderr, "Unexpected lingering\n");
exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
}
The rest LGTM.
Thanks,
Stefano
>+ fprintf(stderr, "Unexpected lingering\n");
>+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>+ }
>+
>+ control_writeln("DONE");
>+}
>+
>+static void test_stream_nolinger_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
>+{
>+ int fd;
>+
>+ fd = vsock_stream_accept(VMADDR_CID_ANY, opts->peer_port, NULL);
>+ if (fd < 0) {
>+ perror("accept");
>+ exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>+ }
>+
>+ control_expectln("DONE");
>+ close(fd);
>+}
>+
> static struct test_case test_cases[] = {
> {
> .name = "SOCK_STREAM connection reset",
>@@ -1999,6 +2043,11 @@ static struct test_case test_cases[] = {
> .run_client = test_stream_linger_client,
> .run_server = test_stream_linger_server,
> },
>+ {
>+ .name = "SOCK_STREAM SO_LINGER close() on unread",
>+ .run_client = test_stream_nolinger_client,
>+ .run_server = test_stream_nolinger_server,
>+ },
> {},
> };
>
>
>--
>2.49.0
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net-next v5 5/5] vsock/test: Add test for an unexpectedly lingering close()
2025-05-21 14:56 ` Stefano Garzarella
@ 2025-05-21 23:17 ` Michal Luczaj
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Michal Luczaj @ 2025-05-21 23:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefano Garzarella
Cc: David S. Miller, Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni,
Simon Horman, Michael S. Tsirkin, Jason Wang, Xuan Zhuo,
Eugenio Pérez, Stefan Hajnoczi, virtualization, netdev,
linux-kernel, kvm
On 5/21/25 16:56, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:55:23AM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>> There was an issue with SO_LINGER: instead of blocking until all queued
>> messages for the socket have been successfully sent (or the linger timeout
>> has been reached), close() would block until packets were handled by the
>> peer.
>>
>> Add a test to alert on close() lingering when it should not.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@rbox.co>
>> ---
>> tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>> index f401c6a79495bc7fda97012e5bfeabec7dbfb60a..1040503333cf315e52592c876f2c1809b36fdfdb 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>> @@ -1839,6 +1839,50 @@ static void test_stream_linger_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
>> close(fd);
>> }
>>
>> +static void test_stream_nolinger_client(const struct test_opts *opts)
>> +{
>> + bool nowait;
>> + time_t ns;
>> + int fd;
>> +
>> + fd = vsock_stream_connect(opts->peer_cid, opts->peer_port);
>> + if (fd < 0) {
>> + perror("connect");
>> + exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>> + }
>> +
>> + enable_so_linger(fd);
>
> If we use a parameter for the linger timeout, IMO will be easy to
> understand this test, defining the timeout in this test, set it and
> check the value, without defining LINGER_TIMEOUT in util.h.
Yes, you're right. I'll fix that.
>> + send_byte(fd, 1, 0); /* Left unread to expose incorrect behaviour. */
>> + nowait = vsock_wait_sent(fd);
>> +
>> + ns = current_nsec();
>> + close(fd);
>> + ns = current_nsec() - ns;
>> +
>> + if (nowait) {
>> + fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
>> + } else if ((ns + NSEC_PER_SEC - 1) / NSEC_PER_SEC >= LINGER_TIMEOUT) {
>
> Should we define a macro for this conversion?
>
> Or just use DIV_ROUND_UP:
Arrgh, I was looking for that. If you don't care much for a new macro, I'll
explicitly use DIV_ROUND_UP for now.
Thanks!
Michal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread