Re: [PATCH] vsock: use sock_error() to consume sk_err after connect timeout

["Nguyen Dinh Phi [SG]" <phind.uet@gmail.com>]

On 28/7/26 16:21, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 03:34:23PM +0800, Nguyen Dinh Phi [SG] wrote:
>> On 24/7/26 05:43, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>>> On 7/23/26 12:26, Nguyen Dinh Phi [SG] wrote:
>>>>>>>> ...
>>>>>>>> Yeah, we need to handle that part better, I think it's a 
>>>>>>>> leftover when
>>>>>>>> we generalized AF_VSOCK to support more transport than vmci.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Speaking of leftovers, I have trouble understanding where does 
>>>>>> vsock set
>>>>>> sk_err on listener sockets anyway. If it doesn't, why vsock_accept()
>>>>>> checks for it?
>>>>>
>>>>> I can't also see where it can be set TBH. Should we remove it ?
>>>>
>>>> I couldn't find it for listener side too.
>>>
>>> Removing sk_err handling from vsock_accept() solves the problem, right?
>>>
>>> thanks,
>>> Michal
>>
>> Yes, confirmed, removing sk_err checks from vsock_accept() does solve 
>> the problem.
> 
> Okay, so maybe better on going on this direction. WDYT?
> 
> Stefano
> 

I'm still a bit concerned about how connect() and poll() interact here, 
even with the sk_err checks removed from vsock_accept().

For example:
vsock_accept() now lets us reuse a socket whose connect() failed (call 
it r0) as syzbot reproducer does. After listen(), r0 becomes a listener 
(sk_state == TCP_LISTEN) and works correctly -- it accepts connections.

But poll() on r0 still marks POLLERR, even though there is no error on 
that socket at that point.

As I understand it, sk_err holds an error that has not yet been reported 
to userspace. In the blocking vsock_connect() case we have already read 
that error and returned it to the caller, so it is no longer pending
Shouldn't sk_err be consumed/cleared when vsock_connect() returns it to 
userspace?

If you think the POLLERR above is acceptable, I'm fine going with just 
the vsock_accept() change.

Thanks,
Phi.