From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailtransmit04.runbox.com (mailtransmit04.runbox.com [185.226.149.37]) (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 4C0C442E414; Thu, 24 Sep 2026 21:27:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.226.149.37 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790285238; cv=none; b=k8tR9kjiYdDWK8Bz7yu5CimehNN5+A2om+hRJfuQVZPxFs2QAh7k8Li60ZDbnNEg3xFNNR8KE+C8UCKkciJUJAPQuLc/BRW9Uv91TJxYI+HddVnAuE7Pq7W3BSt3YYMuFwqkb/hlt2ewevYxlPPi8JOOE2wH4VzlSDRzRGaZ/6I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790285238; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WeSEsIdrN6td3owWuqmG3fnbCN0BRVTLIdJFtLyExCA=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:From:Subject:To:Cc:References: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=aC3wgBvJ8Bzq8tffJOSrmSBC+hp0MljddIDBbFjZZPdO0IHxVMou/HzjepGXk5McvMcaRVfF3QBVAhb8ZYd/Ih1P3I/oR4lIp60dAWW9OP6G3swL4U8D9gaviDcT7IePefdjVldihirujwmPZP46TkMgaC+KVdjBBAZ6QreGA00= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=rbox.co; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rbox.co; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rbox.co header.i=@rbox.co header.b=aXdsXiTg; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.226.149.37 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=rbox.co Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rbox.co Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rbox.co header.i=@rbox.co header.b="aXdsXiTg" Received: from mailtransmit03.runbox ([10.9.9.163] helo=aibo.runbox.com) by mailtransmit04.runbox.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1x9qy6-00A1u0-HL; Thu, 24 Sep 2026 23:27:02 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rbox.co; s=selector1; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:References: Cc:To:Subject:From:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID; bh=t/jdVlLaiEn4bqSyNDSfDJ0wbOugkQLM4FXNsmpyMXI=; b=aXdsXiTg3E5IxDpiWMhg5Hw6Bl Md49H9PyqTVeSZgC86DQnYIHHYUUSR3sWZMxV6zds6MWEx509Qm0hNGAGLxRqu67bUJPMMlm9XNp6 A4xWYF5pWUC6CfowqhdsZw10Tu/Z2qihJp5ltAv02jO64Iwe7msUglcO9QLP5fXXy8N18UaAH2VZp uj6REykTrXAFPwkTjPE3i2h4NvGy6HkwWam7tABEBIaNM4NPBA74+4VVtF2Tmvw7gmcM5DNx2c4mx BNAS+FFQqXJ2u5iA5rIQRnBTbS1rpVfdzDyuWXQpGxT7raHcP0B50M4WlhOPOlLSzQNkakaSV0tGa fVd8GvtQ==; Received: from [10.9.9.74] (helo=submission03.runbox) by mailtransmit03.runbox with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1x9qy1-0006Jl-4O; Thu, 24 Sep 2026 23:26:57 +0200 Received: by submission03.runbox with esmtpsa [Authenticated ID (604044)] (TLS1.2:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.95) id 1x9qxt-006cN3-1W; Thu, 24 Sep 2026 23:26:49 +0200 Message-ID: <6c1516ca-4699-4d9b-af6e-c7762759d495@rbox.co> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 23:26:47 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird From: Michal Luczaj Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2 3/5] vsock: Enforce no-transport invariant for TCP_LISTEN sockets To: Stefano Garzarella Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Jason Wang , =?UTF-8?Q?Eugenio_P=C3=A9rez?= , "David S. Miller" , Xuan Zhuo , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , Asias He , kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20260915-vsock-connect-reset-closing-v2-0-a1d9abb472f7@rbox.co> <20260915-vsock-connect-reset-closing-v2-3-a1d9abb472f7@rbox.co> <0bc40e5c-8790-4a36-84bc-80e0bfe6b504@rbox.co> Content-Language: pl-PL, en-GB In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 9/24/26 12:17, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 03:18:13PM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote: >> ... >> I've addressed all your other comments for v2 and went through Ashiko's >> reports (side effects of lockless peer_shutdown write, imperfect >> no-transport TCP_LISTENER enforcement). I've decided to try the >> eager-unassign approach. I think/hope this way we sidestep the lockless >> writes and enforce the invariant without breaking the API, while fixing the >> bugs. >> >> This should probably be RFC, but I'm posting as v3[1] so netdev's LLM can >> have a go (too). Hope I'm not breaking any workflow. Let me know what you >> think. > > I think you can add RFC also on a v3 patch, just to make it clear you > are not sure it's ready to be merged. > > That said, thanks for that :-) I'll take a look today or next week > because I'm off tomorrow. > > I'm just worried it's becoming too big for net. Anyway, I'll comment > there. Yeah, I get it. Would you rather have a single net.git patch[1] for the original report + keep all the rest for net-next, or do the whole series as is, but slowly at net-next? [1]: Basically https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20260915-vsock-connect-reset-closing-v2-4-a1d9abb472f7@rbox.co/ + your comments addressed + addressing one of Sashiko's comments, and ignoring the transport-reset-surprise one