[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF=yD-K8FMicoSS6u-0r_J0p0fTyn4GNwhXn7_gRSSMYmAzw5g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2017 11:18:16 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Matthew Dawson <matthew@...systems.ca>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"Macieira, Thiago" <thiago.macieira@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] datagram: When peeking datagrams with offset < 0
don't skip empty skbs
> If I read the above correctly, you are arguining in favor of the
> addittional flag version, right?
I was. Though if we are going to thread the argument from the caller
to __skb_try_recv_from_queue to avoid rereading sk->sk_peek_off,
on second thought it might be simpler to do it through off:
@@ -511,7 +511,9 @@ static inline int sk_peek_offset(struct sock *sk, int flags)
if (unlikely(flags & MSG_PEEK)) {
s32 off = READ_ONCE(sk->sk_peek_off);
if (off >= 0)
- return off;
+ return off + 1;
+ else
+ return 0;
}
return 0;
In __skb_try_recv_from_queue we can then disambiguate the two as follows:
@@ -170,13 +170,19 @@ struct sk_buff *__skb_try_recv_from_queue(struct sock *sk,
struct sk_buff **last)
{
struct sk_buff *skb;
- int _off = *off;
+ bool peek_at_off = false;
+ int _off = 0;
+
+ if (flags & MSG_PEEK && *off) {
+ peek_at_off = true;
+ _off = (*off) - 1;
+ }
*last = queue->prev;
skb_queue_walk(queue, skb) {
if (flags & MSG_PEEK) {
- if (_off >= skb->len && (skb->len || _off ||
- skb->peeked)) {
+ if (peek_at_off && _off >= skb->len &&
+ (skb->len || _off || skb->peeked)) {
This, of course, requires restricting sk_peek_off to protect against overflow.
If I'm not mistaken, the test in udp_recvmsg currently incorrectly sets
peeking to false when peeking at offset zero:
peeking = off = sk_peek_offset(sk, flags);
> --- a/net/core/sock.c
> +++ b/net/core/sock.c
> @@ -2408,9 +2408,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(__sk_mem_reclaim);
>
> int sk_set_peek_off(struct sock *sk, int val)
> {
> - if (val < 0)
> - return -EINVAL;
> -
> + /* a negative value will disable peeking with offset */
> sk->sk_peek_off = val;
> return 0;
> }
Separate patch to net-next?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists