From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (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 0F7C943DA23 for ; Fri, 15 May 2026 09:21:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778836869; cv=none; b=e8bMIsoGFngKAY5YdvNddPYZlAPw06LRdxBOMFffmqiCvKjFL+JHIZ2iIxFqxYsfLzfdJsN/Ocvu1MRwsqBGp+raoGGqPlg/oRB6mLr9XLNuWHkl4QxxtUffWBk5Oro+TboW4eLLE2T/bWloiXViBs7FSBWnnU+lSes1+6EYcy4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1778836869; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kvhGlFT183z46f4prQv9UsB0406P5Y8xm81IA80kJuM=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Disposition; b=Pe6cFV5WTXceK4Ej+XsduG+j7swAskT0zN9JZGTc7p2SnVwk38zco/sAuUaJl49ykc7iJlgVvEONjT6+VowC3jvnuOpcVu2VGU7pf1o676giobGqgcTc54qY4IUkKTUJm/YVHIBXp5Y/KcRfYqCu1X6R1euF7FvDfDduzeuLxmE= 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=MMWI7QoZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 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="MMWI7QoZ" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1778836865; 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=coiGVgNORCz4Zh3xYVYNCYPRQwJYgr83BYwKKI9/FxM=; b=MMWI7QoZJiBEnfxzaPj6M48nklJyv4QBeghrEtuPeXJ+cWoKZ4CaKEB0okGTlP0saEt2Je wK6ScJ62yyACE2HdDFF19dWvNyeqWCWy1j49oPgT7MpE+LEsKocMvPVP1dhUO+u6zOSk4h G6U1uP3hVRVL181rGdvrTLRCvdFtJsY= Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-614-g_qB6IJnNraNTIWCNaFTjA-1; Fri, 15 May 2026 05:21:00 -0400 X-MC-Unique: g_qB6IJnNraNTIWCNaFTjA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: g_qB6IJnNraNTIWCNaFTjA_1778836859 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-45aeac88af4so3195935f8f.3 for ; Fri, 15 May 2026 02:21:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1778836859; x=1779441659; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=coiGVgNORCz4Zh3xYVYNCYPRQwJYgr83BYwKKI9/FxM=; b=iui/TkC3tBH/FjInOlChobKVdqR2c1ya/u5Fa909aQSwbrs82Satr/F4H22NfEQ/ax 3M7G83tt1w9SiUikrjwv6xLnfLom5Qrorb/UD3AGqNmghrf4bYPemjl0Yk1QM4bDkw0k TJyCaqW6hGgWxJiR2YVt3/in+STdEPacHSidw48Tjnqz5cGhjf8HKtkwXQQI1MKbFb7l nXwkFFpPcn+60WzHvYhTxqOUunOUet+KKXRiTFW1AaQjjHQlJEwhEKeiPIKCIAe2tjo4 Z22C39dQvjbSRb1CF61htLi/1E0Hx+r3SqIHFWxlhimkkywsdcyLBO2kyBgUULr2k8AS /Byg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AFNElJ8dDGRiowf6XEMTpQbQtfNWtKZCJ9aRBq04of5k1MGM9JJnyCfP/VQUK/Rh19cviPLFjPaRXGOvx5BRx04MeQ==@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwEzjYDZSWlAdaxzk3Bsrff5XH86j2u04OXQEM42HjY3KTXBfBN b1s/H/1KqSsnVQPtPf3aPNKnRbuiX0I+IhEkuVCiW3IgfqZVEEK9qP3UXi2hspUzUB3nnTuBdlh +WvvkjtFC3ENujWI+0+rvpVoOAartOqk5mCNDxYu3UIEnoBuuCBhHPfQtrZuC9I1rvIehvPfO7o xq X-Gm-Gg: Acq92OHKkLeKDu1sDyAFoZhU/w2IBVp4/uDs74KaY/Y0i+QQwD4VWrPl/6UJLE24TfU y0SKYsLY/tW6bj/VnEKlJA6j1mDrAhMqQ9b8RBgtdg4Y+aPV5v50Dpbt5ndG3Wjaa09WhKX5N4s bezvg8JTy2DqqwJ1Qurvx5pWbrFAO7lEGa6sUHSwVSGu56K5YfER05E5a3LN0wUF6wyF8Dv4Edf Y9VT0+ILZCfYnUa6lhM9Dn1JnVAGmWXMZ4WqUaUpymWjv++52GvTAv5+GWOTbemmSxoW9OF0XlG 9lDMCWXmLuEAWazQam4QY0CBVjvXNthJlnHqmAsfOrPvobaJwi67SOELHcym5PHgx75oTU+2hwf Er6Qa4p2SQlUhAKe9C6kwmyZq5Lc5Zu7HVf33/XuCW6xxol9Cezk= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:22c5:b0:43c:f5a0:4e56 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-45e5c5f9d94mr3855117f8f.42.1778836858717; Fri, 15 May 2026 02:20:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:22c5:b0:43c:f5a0:4e56 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-45e5c5f9d94mr3854928f8f.42.1778836856499; Fri, 15 May 2026 02:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com (IGLD-80-230-48-7.inter.net.il. [80.230.48.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-45d9ec39ff1sm13634930f8f.10.2026.05.15.02.20.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 15 May 2026 02:20:56 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 May 2026 05:20:53 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Stefano Garzarella Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Xuan Zhuo , Eugenio =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E9rez?= , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Simon Horman , Paolo Abeni , Jakub Kicinski , Jason Wang , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Hajnoczi , virtualization@lists.linux.dev, Eric Dumazet , "David S. Miller" Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3 1/2] vsock/virtio: reset connection on receiving queue overflow Message-ID: <20260515051829-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20260513105417.56761-1-sgarzare@redhat.com> <20260513105417.56761-2-sgarzare@redhat.com> <20260514111513-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20260514134347-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20260515043940-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: virtualization@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-MFC-PROC-ID: 3FBwdTcRZy74rX-bLLQcTrGtb04w9Pjr4Og0eWc6anw_1778836859 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 11:06:42AM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 04:57:41AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 10:29:55AM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > > On Thu, May 14, 2026 at 01:44:53PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 14, 2026 at 06:45:00PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 14 May 2026 at 17:16, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > [...] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > And so the bag of hacks grows. I feel this is energy not well spent. > > > > > > Please, let us fix this properly *first*. And then worry about how to > > > > > > backport. Maybe it will not be so terrible to backport after all. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > TBH I don't think this is an hack, but an issue we should fix in any case. > > > > > Regarding the second patch, I see your point, but it's a big change > > > > > that worries me. I'd like some more time to fix it properly without > > > > > rushing. Staying calm without realizing that userspace is broken like > > > > > we are now without this series :-( > > > > > > > > > > That said, evaluating further, I think we have a similar issue also > > > > > with STREAM on the host side where the skb usually doesn't free space, > > > > > so we need a merge strategy also there. > > > > > > > > > > So, I'd like to have time to fix both definitely. If you have time and > > > > > want to go ahead, please do. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > Stefano > > > > > > > > Well my patch was a start, we just need a strategy how to avoid copying > > > > everything, right? > > > > > > Yep, and then there's the question of how to handle EOM without a payload, > > > but I think that's a special case. In theory, we don't support sending it, > > > but I'm not sure if POSIX allows it or not. > > > > It seems to, but given we didn't allow it in the past, we probably > > should not start now without a good solution. > > Agree. > > > Really we should add a feature bit for EOM to steal a byte from > > buf_alloc. Or several bytes) > > Yes, I agree. At this point, though, could we define a new protocol that > also takes overhead into account, or would it be too complicated to > synchronize both? Well isn't it just X bytes per EOM? The rest can be fixed with merging? > > > > > That said, is it okay if I send a v4 of this series? > > > > > > (I'm not sure if I'll be able to work on the merging next week) > > > > > > Stefano > > > > > > I do worry we are piling up hacks and we'll end up with races > > for all our troubles. That said, up to you. > > > > I see it differently; Patch 1 should have been there from the start. > Patch 2, unless we completely remove the overhead, we should keep it, or use > it to trigger merging (e.g., when the overhead reaches a threshold that > depends on `buf_alloc`). I'm not sure we need to merge retroactively though. Maybe just start merging new stuff when over a threshold. Should be simpler. > I prefer to send a v4. > > Thanks, > Stefano