linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] vsock/test: Introduce vsock_wait

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <kva35i6sjyxuugywlanlnkbdunbyauadgnciteakxu2jsb2kl7@24fgdq2glxk6>
Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 17:01:25 +0200
From: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
To: Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, 
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, 
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, 
	Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@...hat.com>, 
	Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@...hat.com>, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 3/5] vsock/test: Introduce vsock_wait_sent()
 helper

On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:55:21AM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>Distill the virtio_vsock_sock::bytes_unsent checking loop (ioctl SIOCOUTQ)
>and move it to utils. Tweak the comment.
>
>Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@...x.co>
>---
> tools/testing/vsock/util.c       | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> tools/testing/vsock/util.h       |  1 +
> tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 23 ++++++-----------------
> 3 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
>index de25892f865f07672da0886be8bd1a429ade8b05..120277be14ab2f58e0350adcdd56fc18861399c9 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.c
>@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
> #include <assert.h>
> #include <sys/epoll.h>
> #include <sys/mman.h>
>+#include <linux/sockios.h>
>
> #include "timeout.h"
> #include "control.h"
>@@ -96,6 +97,30 @@ void vsock_wait_remote_close(int fd)
> 	close(epollfd);
> }
>
>+/* Wait until transport reports no data left to be sent.
>+ * Return non-zero if transport does not implement the unsent_bytes() callback.
>+ */
>+int vsock_wait_sent(int fd)

nit: I just see we use `bool` in the test to store the result of this 
function, so maybe we can return `bool` directl from here...

(not a strong opinion, it's fine also this).

Thanks,
Stefano

>+{
>+	int ret, sock_bytes_unsent;
>+
>+	timeout_begin(TIMEOUT);
>+	do {
>+		ret = ioctl(fd, SIOCOUTQ, &sock_bytes_unsent);
>+		if (ret < 0) {
>+			if (errno == EOPNOTSUPP)
>+				break;
>+
>+			perror("ioctl(SIOCOUTQ)");
>+			exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>+		}
>+		timeout_check("SIOCOUTQ");
>+	} while (sock_bytes_unsent != 0);
>+	timeout_end();
>+
>+	return ret;
>+}
>+
> /* Create socket <type>, bind to <cid, port> and return the file descriptor. */
> int vsock_bind(unsigned int cid, unsigned int port, int type)
> {
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
>index d1f765ce3eeeed8f738630846bb47c4f3f6f946f..e307f0d4f6940e984b84a95fd0d57598e7c4e35f 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/util.h
>@@ -54,6 +54,7 @@ int vsock_stream_listen(unsigned int cid, unsigned int port);
> int vsock_seqpacket_accept(unsigned int cid, unsigned int port,
> 			   struct sockaddr_vm *clientaddrp);
> void vsock_wait_remote_close(int fd);
>+int vsock_wait_sent(int fd);
> void send_buf(int fd, const void *buf, size_t len, int flags,
> 	      ssize_t expected_ret);
> void recv_buf(int fd, void *buf, size_t len, int flags, ssize_t expected_ret);
>diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>index 9ea33b78b9fcb532f4f9616b38b4d2b627b04d31..4c2c94151070d54d1ed6e6af5a6de0b262a0206e 100644
>--- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>@@ -21,7 +21,6 @@
> #include <poll.h>
> #include <signal.h>
> #include <sys/ioctl.h>
>-#include <linux/sockios.h>
> #include <linux/time64.h>
>
> #include "vsock_test_zerocopy.h"
>@@ -1280,7 +1279,7 @@ static void test_unsent_bytes_server(const struct test_opts *opts, int type)
> static void test_unsent_bytes_client(const struct test_opts *opts, int type)
> {
> 	unsigned char buf[MSG_BUF_IOCTL_LEN];
>-	int ret, fd, sock_bytes_unsent;
>+	int fd;
>
> 	fd = vsock_connect(opts->peer_cid, opts->peer_port, type);
> 	if (fd < 0) {
>@@ -1297,22 +1296,12 @@ static void test_unsent_bytes_client(const struct test_opts *opts, int type)
> 	/* SIOCOUTQ isn't guaranteed to instantly track sent data. Even though
> 	 * the "RECEIVED" message means that the other side has received the
> 	 * data, there can be a delay in our kernel before updating the "unsent
>-	 * bytes" counter. Repeat SIOCOUTQ until it returns 0.
>+	 * bytes" counter. vsock_wait_sent() will repeat SIOCOUTQ until it
>+	 * returns 0.
> 	 */
>-	timeout_begin(TIMEOUT);
>-	do {
>-		ret = ioctl(fd, SIOCOUTQ, &sock_bytes_unsent);
>-		if (ret < 0) {
>-			if (errno == EOPNOTSUPP) {
>-				fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
>-				break;
>-			}
>-			perror("ioctl");
>-			exit(EXIT_FAILURE);
>-		}
>-		timeout_check("SIOCOUTQ");
>-	} while (sock_bytes_unsent != 0);
>-	timeout_end();
>+	if (vsock_wait_sent(fd))
>+		fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n");
>+
> 	close(fd);
> }
>
>
>-- 
>2.49.0
>