netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com>
To: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
Cc: network dev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@gmail.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>, Gang He <ghe@suse.com>,
	GuoQing Jiang <gqjiang@suse.com>
Subject: Re: non-blocking connect for kernel SCTP sockets
Date: Wed, 2 May 2018 17:46:23 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADvbK_fT5qYmOKHgBf6KWyuRcDUT3Fa8DyMQkN75C8PFkPKLXw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180502090639.j55mnclmkzdts6xb@unicorn.suse.cz>

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 5:06 PM, Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> while investigating a bug, we noticed that DLM tries to connect an SCTP
> socket in non-blocking mode using
>
>         result = sock->ops->connect(sock, (struct sockaddr *)&daddr, addr_len,
>                                     O_NONBLOCK);
>
> which does not work. The reason is that inet_dgram_connect() cannot pass
> its flags argument to sctp_connect() so that __sctp_connect() which does
> the actual waiting resorts to checking sk->sk_socket->file->f_flags
> instead. As the socket used by DLM is a kernel socket with no associated
> file, it ends up blocking.
>
> TCP doesn't suffer from this problem as for TCP, the waiting is done in
> inet_stream_connect() which has the flags argument. I also checked other
> proto::connect handlers and sctp_connect() seems to be the only one with
> this kind of problem.
>
> This could be worked around in DLM and further experiments indicate
> current DLM code wouldn't actually handle the non-blocking connect
> properly. But I still feel ignoring the flags argument is rather a trap
> that should be fixed.
It is a bug, https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1251530

We have the fix which also includes some cleanup, and needs to do
more testing.

>
> I have prepared a series adding flags argument to proto::connect and
> using it in sctp_connect() and __sctp_connect(). But I'm not sure if
> it's not too big hammer to address issue only affecting one handler.
> So my question is: would such generic approach be preferred or should we,
> rather make SCTP work the way TCP does, i.e. move the waiting from,
> proto::connect() to proto_ops::connect()? This would require introducing
> inet_seqpacket_connect() as inet_dgram_connect() is primarily intended
> for use with UDP.)
We don't fix it in the generic proto::connect, which will afftect
many other places.

We're replacing only sctp's proto_ops::connect with sctp_connect and
leave its proto::connect as NULL, so that it can get this flags param
without touching the generic struct and code.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-02  9:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-02  9:06 non-blocking connect for kernel SCTP sockets Michal Kubecek
2018-05-02  9:46 ` Xin Long [this message]
2018-05-02 12:32   ` Michal Kubecek
2018-05-02 13:36     ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner

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=CADvbK_fT5qYmOKHgBf6KWyuRcDUT3Fa8DyMQkN75C8PFkPKLXw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=lucien.xin@gmail.com \
    --cc=ghe@suse.com \
    --cc=gqjiang@suse.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mkubecek@suse.cz \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nhorman@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=vyasevich@gmail.com \
    /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).