[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <002b18c9-f2cc-046d-def8-f99bd9e0125d@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2023 15:47:21 +0200
From: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: Keith Busch <kbusch@...nel.org>, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Boris Pismenny <boris.pismenny@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] net/tls: implement ->read_sock()
On 7/24/23 14:59, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>
>
> On 7/21/23 17:35, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> Implement ->read_sock() function for use with nvme-tcp.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>
>> Reviewed-by: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
>> Cc: Boris Pismenny <boris.pismenny@...il.com>
>> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
>> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
>> ---
>> net/tls/tls.h | 2 ++
>> net/tls/tls_main.c | 2 ++
>> net/tls/tls_sw.c | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 3 files changed, 93 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/net/tls/tls.h b/net/tls/tls.h
>> index 86cef1c68e03..7e4d45537deb 100644
>> --- a/net/tls/tls.h
>> +++ b/net/tls/tls.h
>> @@ -110,6 +110,8 @@ bool tls_sw_sock_is_readable(struct sock *sk);
>> ssize_t tls_sw_splice_read(struct socket *sock, loff_t *ppos,
>> struct pipe_inode_info *pipe,
>> size_t len, unsigned int flags);
>> +int tls_sw_read_sock(struct sock *sk, read_descriptor_t *desc,
>> + sk_read_actor_t read_actor);
>> int tls_device_sendmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t
>> size);
>> void tls_device_splice_eof(struct socket *sock);
>> diff --git a/net/tls/tls_main.c b/net/tls/tls_main.c
>> index b6896126bb92..7dbb8cd8f809 100644
>> --- a/net/tls/tls_main.c
>> +++ b/net/tls/tls_main.c
>> @@ -962,10 +962,12 @@ static void build_proto_ops(struct proto_ops
>> ops[TLS_NUM_CONFIG][TLS_NUM_CONFIG]
>> ops[TLS_BASE][TLS_SW ] = ops[TLS_BASE][TLS_BASE];
>> ops[TLS_BASE][TLS_SW ].splice_read = tls_sw_splice_read;
>> ops[TLS_BASE][TLS_SW ].poll = tls_sk_poll;
>> + ops[TLS_BASE][TLS_SW ].read_sock = tls_sw_read_sock;
>> ops[TLS_SW ][TLS_SW ] = ops[TLS_SW ][TLS_BASE];
>> ops[TLS_SW ][TLS_SW ].splice_read = tls_sw_splice_read;
>> ops[TLS_SW ][TLS_SW ].poll = tls_sk_poll;
>> + ops[TLS_SW ][TLS_SW ].read_sock = tls_sw_read_sock;
>> #ifdef CONFIG_TLS_DEVICE
>> ops[TLS_HW ][TLS_BASE] = ops[TLS_BASE][TLS_BASE];
>> diff --git a/net/tls/tls_sw.c b/net/tls/tls_sw.c
>> index d0636ea13009..f7ffbe7620cb 100644
>> --- a/net/tls/tls_sw.c
>> +++ b/net/tls/tls_sw.c
>> @@ -2202,6 +2202,95 @@ ssize_t tls_sw_splice_read(struct socket
>> *sock, loff_t *ppos,
>> goto splice_read_end;
>> }
>> +int tls_sw_read_sock(struct sock *sk, read_descriptor_t *desc,
>> + sk_read_actor_t read_actor)
>> +{
>> + struct tls_context *tls_ctx = tls_get_ctx(sk);
>> + struct tls_sw_context_rx *ctx = tls_sw_ctx_rx(tls_ctx);
>> + struct strp_msg *rxm = NULL;
>> + struct sk_buff *skb = NULL;
>> + struct sk_psock *psock;
>> + struct tls_msg *tlm;
>> + ssize_t copied = 0;
>> + int err, used;
>> +
>> + psock = sk_psock_get(sk);
>> + if (psock) {
>> + sk_psock_put(sk, psock);
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> + err = tls_rx_reader_acquire(sk, ctx, true);
>> + if (err < 0)
>> + return err;
>> +
>> + /* If crypto failed the connection is broken */
>> + err = ctx->async_wait.err;
>> + if (err)
>> + goto read_sock_end;
>> +
>> + do {
>> + if (!skb_queue_empty(&ctx->rx_list)) {
>> + skb = __skb_dequeue(&ctx->rx_list);
>> + rxm = strp_msg(skb);
>> + tlm = tls_msg(skb);
>> + } else {
>> + struct tls_decrypt_arg darg;
>> +
>> + err = tls_rx_rec_wait(sk, NULL, true, true);
>> + if (err <= 0)
>> + goto read_sock_end;
>> +
>> + memset(&darg.inargs, 0, sizeof(darg.inargs));
>> +
>> + rxm = strp_msg(tls_strp_msg(ctx));
>> + tlm = tls_msg(tls_strp_msg(ctx));
>> +
>> + err = tls_rx_one_record(sk, NULL, &darg);
>> + if (err < 0) {
>> + tls_err_abort(sk, -EBADMSG);
>> + goto read_sock_end;
>> + }
>> +
>> + sk_flush_backlog(sk);
>
> Question,
> Based on Jakub's comment, the flush is better spaced out.
> Why not just do it once at the end? Or alternatively,
> call tls_read_flush_backlog() ? Or just count by hand
> every 4 records or 128K (and once in the end)?
>
> I don't really know what would be the impact though, but
> you are effectively releasing and re-acquiring the socket
> flushing the backlog every record...
I really have no idea.
I'll see to modify it to use tls_read_flush_backlog().
Cheers,
Hannes
--
Dr. Hannes Reinecke Kernel Storage Architect
hare@...e.de +49 911 74053 688
SUSE Software Solutions GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
HRB 36809 (AG Nürnberg), Geschäftsführer: Ivo Totev, Andrew
Myers, Andrew McDonald, Martje Boudien Moerman
Powered by blists - more mailing lists