From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (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 6819B3B8D7E for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 10:18:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789035531; cv=none; b=ku/EGwMrM01NVSiKc1QbUDalU7R2Mi72aOrCBc+ovs+CcAUXorNUP/S70EOVI/Dcu4G0asLte0feg5PRMWWB7Tfdrqims4BWLRhc9p8owAkiBo3LOOocJxeFEPYsX2xFwxZ2w4UFx17/gazCJGS/xdAEdkVLE/tKuVc0GMUt/m0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789035531; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GhdPZv9zx9m7HXkFvx00ZAigkONoSz1aFYJQXaX6wfw=; h=From:In-Reply-To:References:To:Cc:Subject:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Date:Message-ID; b=QPsctz5N/12QjdOfRc8tdi0/41B7m6qMOtBJqzlLF4Ez0xf5/P+oHgBKdrFQ0j1r+mmSrNLCjjvtYSsNJjqWbZNMhr0YlkEwaSG6kEjRL2MZVkUq5asBYBbg1gKyxdMWy3nzuY51TYgDlU2qlG1qq1CjGeH6M+THEWZ/I8NrytQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=TXd5ae2A; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="TXd5ae2A" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1789035527; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=MorH7EGnFDFfnoYjZ8yy0Tahkv8+0MJQwew0SsuDs50=; b=TXd5ae2AHSucybVODrh4vWwU5Ru09PwxpsTuOGx7R7y8DCBIkV26f8OjtisOQwQP129XiC gsq60DBp0mG+pWa9qWgZgOKyGhaENMMp1UpP+5LW0q85SjqBuxnmgAOL0A7Ibm8yd5eYGb T2w6PajA47qogX3j0+Njq4dC7VViUwM= Received: from mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-33-Sa8b3DoRPNyHqtMOQFdFkg-1; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 06:18:44 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Sa8b3DoRPNyHqtMOQFdFkg-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: Sa8b3DoRPNyHqtMOQFdFkg_1789035522 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-05.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9451D1954223; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 10:18:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from warthog.procyon.org.uk (unknown [10.44.32.54]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 463B3195608C; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 10:18:38 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20260907140644.18dba619@pumpkin> References: <20260907140644.18dba619@pumpkin> <20260907113743.1453210-1-dhowells@redhat.com> <20260907113743.1453210-2-dhowells@redhat.com> To: David Laight Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Marc Dionne , Jakub Kicinski , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net v9 01/14] afs: Fix lack of loop around sendmsg() to rxrpc 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-ID: <2029748.1789035516.1@warthog.procyon.org.uk> Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 11:18:36 +0100 Message-ID: <2029749.1789035516@warthog.procyon.org.uk> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 David Laight wrote: > > + do { > > + ret = rxrpc_kernel_send_data(call->net->socket, rxcall, &msg, > > + msg_data_left(&msg), > > + afs_notify_end_request_tx); > > + if (ret < 0) > > + goto error_do_abort; > > + } while (msg_data_left(&msg) > 0); > > Is there any reason you didn't change rxrpc_kernel_send_data() instead? My thought was to keep rxrpc_kernel_send_data() operating reasonably similarly to sendmsg(), but I think you're right - that's a better way to do this since I don't think there's a circumstance that I wouldn't then loop around it. David