[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ccb9e602-88c1-6d72-75f6-4a3c84549b72@sberdevices.ru>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2022 15:16:38 +0000
From: Arseniy Krasnov <AVKrasnov@...rdevices.ru>
To: Vishnu Dasa <vdasa@...are.com>,
Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com>
CC: Bryan Tan <bryantan@...are.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"kys@...rosoft.com" <kys@...rosoft.com>,
"haiyangz@...rosoft.com" <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>,
"wei.liu@...nel.org" <wei.liu@...nel.org>,
Dexuan Cui <decui@...rosoft.com>,
Krasnov Arseniy <oxffffaa@...il.com>,
Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...il.com>,
Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org"
<virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org" <linux-hyperv@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel <kernel@...rdevices.ru>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 3/6] vsock/vmci: always return ENOMEM in case of
error
On 01.12.2022 18:14, Vishnu Dasa wrote:
>
>
>> On Dec 1, 2022, at 1:30 AM, Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> !! External Email
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 25, 2022 at 05:08:06PM +0000, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>> From: Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>
>>>
>>> This saves original behaviour from af_vsock.c - switch any error
>>> code returned from transport layer to ENOMEM.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@...edance.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <AVKrasnov@...rdevices.ru>
>>> ---
>>> net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c | 9 ++++++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> @Bryan @Vishnu what do you think about this patch?
>>
>> A bit of context:
>>
>> Before this series, the af_vsock core always returned ENOMEM to the user
>> if the transport failed to queue the packet.
>>
>> Now we are changing it by returning the transport error. So I think here
>> we want to preserve the previous behavior for vmci, but I don't know if
>> that's the right thing.
>>
>
> Agree with Stefano. I don't think we need to preserve the previous
> behavior for vmci.
Good! I'll remove this patch from the next version
Thanks, Arseniy
>
>>
>> @Arseniy please in the next versions describe better in the commit
>> messages the reasons for these changes, so it is easier review for
>> others and also in the future by reading the commit message we can
>> understand the reason for the change.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Stefano
>>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c b/net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c
>>> index 842c94286d31..289a36a203a2 100644
>>> --- a/net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c
>>> +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/vmci_transport.c
>>> @@ -1838,7 +1838,14 @@ static ssize_t vmci_transport_stream_enqueue(
>>> struct msghdr *msg,
>>> size_t len)
>>> {
>>> - return vmci_qpair_enquev(vmci_trans(vsk)->qpair, msg, len, 0);
>>> + int err;
>>> +
>>> + err = vmci_qpair_enquev(vmci_trans(vsk)->qpair, msg, len, 0);
>>> +
>>> + if (err < 0)
>>> + err = -ENOMEM;
>>> +
>>> + return err;
>>> }
>>>
>>> static s64 vmci_transport_stream_has_data(struct vsock_sock *vsk)
>>> --
>>> 2.25.1
>>
>>
>> !! External Email: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender.
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists