From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-b5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b5-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.148]) (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 33B7D39E191; Thu, 30 Jul 2026 23:40:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.148 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785454847; cv=none; b=KbQ5hjaV5UPYL/GwnV8hO8QdKi/yImUa4U31J/Pn9cArRPD9enQaA+2DzmriTDzXe56pL7+YV9vFMqy89+oIiQCPxns0jndnpwZyUmuTS3V51Jq6AfYSt08cBmTUA5ioxTXj2YfCyWiC4UMqj9N64hQ5VlVzkkYFBY2s8alKtWA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785454847; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0PNVvQgfL86+YniH6IHoJ9fAdMxPjBqjO5seQ79794M=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=op85+jWyCovDhsKmB8sIz0ZB1/2JIPYh/VBaWUxcYXuao582fAfZFeY5/KihP98tp6+F41+zJdAwnZZ9ofqF52tukP7JBZygbocUQmJG1s3X5bvJHBFiHuxM5Azwsq7rMzRJIqulE66rwnJn+z3pPs1I8nVzgcPVlsXEhm9yo6k= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=queasysnail.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=queasysnail.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=queasysnail.net header.i=@queasysnail.net header.b=mhb8RRty; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=l2pO+Nj/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.148 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=queasysnail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=queasysnail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=queasysnail.net header.i=@queasysnail.net header.b="mhb8RRty"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="l2pO+Nj/" Received: from phl-compute-09.internal (phl-compute-09.internal [10.202.2.49]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17C41D000FF; Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:40:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-03 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-09.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:40:44 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=queasysnail.net; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1785454843; x= 1785541243; bh=jm90P0QTqonir4lfY0yCf15wuiPe9qHY5yBWGJm+IBo=; b=m hb8RRtye2BYSIkoNqU6aFODz+x/gG025jt5rgnauAo7dNKuKh7GVJRuRwHEzvIKX lIovAEivGDRg2+73ESxMJcn73FBcHsKAHZ34SI5GFGE/bWOjneKJWjzIghNZnw8j LR5ow7cugeYkL8CrSIxQzEb1RAP/HIe7NZ2Y1JkfGtms29t9qOImRpusoihocFI/ hxfJsFXOcDlOeoD1anZ/Zago8kUOWEYjLIjFdT/AaGSq3VqYcPZbpBbDnfATaQGG fBSdKw6QoJqsnO2yDegSVuzYr1nyrF7ye8TNxHLJ+C3QgtQD0P/wdjId8rMMr+cx NpHCUUOdI5ZM9Ab49cWsg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1785454843; x=1785541243; bh=jm90P0QTqonir4lfY0yCf15wuiPe9qHY5yB WGJm+IBo=; b=l2pO+Nj/2wl23I/OqdSRmKKIpUjMGVRpgZuhjYMga5dgbWMKBAY tw077g6pWd9JVT7S8d5CtSqhb7zz00IE6FajmZ+MdXRJJOPqIZ8H0+s0wrvsDoPs wdAqdSFXWVy+GYTk0W9RnZ0435qBYXwKTiA8HzxnU3/Q/BseaxVUgS3Vnsczb1kE SQdPCwA+4vEzm1+DedEmY7bcNKZ8zlVpSLnanSjbRw7pvgX3irpPY4TxH0XpBsU/ oIhwNlfLH36hzU/UBOt43AEjAZGnsKakf7rNulxEGeieMOpj7lLppawOTk5eKk9/ kJpJ9GFFEtH/jE9m/+G4RSPZc9owfTIh6qA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: dmFkZTFYVk8NcSk2wbNwhdLtdsXGeH/R86n5D6efhvDDwcgweVCYRCd6ygvYP0P0kRw4HE NEk522CLUaeiD3DmFH9Csg5IQMZO9JjS8trb9+IYM+AIOZcr39azQXu37Auhe68cm/jvcg kUUdtH4FDa89R1QUWxIqAw3K/bAGBzzOKN1y4dYMIHOXe4BKMtvSJcgtQIJDHLyoMFnJou p+MNve5ri9MQc1SrhqauCu6WvILKE+XfQ+7oCMThCQVwi0AhdYhmzRq1Eq0usls5P9VT1e xgKRzIf0w4rCVyh93ccd0/Qcct2IJrQnYhsKpIh6MTQ5C4mef2vpk3+jGlLTFCat/SOoKy VKN4JA7g9Iq/PpIIfnh6HwFiOKY6f86jIH6eIQAH9uW75YSIzSqvRM0ZbDo3GD7YhXlpsN M35GhqTk7vjDRkEstp9klgAh/6YxGepivlbgwqDygEBO8xx/SPHPbNVUi1nbV88tfPMgHX Egsyhg68wFRcpQPO34gDy0EBdaBFSZvhQdWuB0nJo4i7VdsRbsSCLrhT/vsR+ou7bqkE+4 Dp+lgBB5RxFiNAx6wNhz6jHNGMfbtWA79lSTN3HbQVPGGS7/Dzn96k7vVUx0iisDSm4r6P CwUYc0RkcNadyLzDXLa15TfUSfHc0cF5RAtl+bzurW8vc+9ZAMD98JqvUejg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i934648bf:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 30 Jul 2026 19:40:42 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 01:40:41 +0200 From: Sabrina Dubroca To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: Chuck Lever , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , John Fastabend , Shuah Khan , Jeff Layton , NeilBrown , Olga Kornievskaia , Dai Ngo , Tom Talpey , netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-tls-handshake@lists.linux.dev, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/6] net: Introduce read_sock_rectype proto_ops for control record delivery Message-ID: References: <20260720-tcp-read-sock-v2-2-29545d034f3c@kernel.org> <20260728185124.72e421c8@kernel.org> <480a8337-a91e-40e5-8dbd-d165599fba4b@app.fastmail.com> <20260728193058.7f6b453b@kernel.org> <20260729163142.4f41484f@kernel.org> <20260730143556.4a8463fd@kernel.org> <20260730163457.1105fa69@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260730163457.1105fa69@kernel.org> 2026-07-30, 16:34:57 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Fri, 31 Jul 2026 01:09:33 +0200 Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > To avoid that, you'd have to run recvmsg-nocmsg/read_sock to get all > > the DATA out, then once you know the next chunk of payload is a > > control record (and hopefully nothing else is reading from your > > socket), one recvmsg+cmsg into a separate buffer. > > I guess the difference in perspective stems from a fact that > I'd look at a socket as a stream one reads and dispatches work > based on the input. Not an abstraction layer that by itself > dispatches different handlers for different message types. I agree. But TCP is a magical world where users don't have to worry about message types, and TLS isn't. It seems the users of the existing (TCP-oriented) API are unhappy with the mismatch, but I'm not convinced we can (and maybe "should") make that work. -- Sabrina