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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 09:30:19 +0100
From: Stefano Garzarella <>
To: Arseniy Krasnov <>
Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <>, 
	"David S. Miller" <>, Eric Dumazet <>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <>, Paolo Abeni <>, 
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <>, Jason Wang <>, 
	Bobby Eshleman <>,,,,,,
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/2] vsock/test: SO_RCVLOWAT + deferred credit
 update test

On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 10:12:38AM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>On 15.11.2023 14:11, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 10:20:04AM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>> This adds test which checks, that updating SO_RCVLOWAT value also sends
>> You can avoid "This adds", and write just "Add test ...".
>> See
>>     Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz"
>>     instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy
>>     to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change
>>     its behaviour.
>> Also in the other patch.
>>> credit update message. Otherwise mutual hungup may happen when receiver
>>> didn't send credit update and then calls 'poll()' with non default
>>> SO_RCVLOWAT value (e.g. waiting enough bytes to read), while sender
>>> waits for free space at receiver's side.
>>> Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <>
>>> ---
>>> tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 131 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+)
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>>> index c1f7bc9abd22..c71b3875fd16 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>>> @@ -1180,6 +1180,132 @@ static void test_stream_shutrd_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
>>>     close(fd);
>>> }
>>> +#define RCVLOWAT_CREDIT_UPD_BUF_SIZE    (1024 * 128)
>>> +#define VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE    (1024 * 64)
>> What about adding a comment like the one in the cover letter about
>> dependency with kernel values?
>> Please add it also in the commit description.
>> I'm thinking if we should move all the defines that depends on the
>> kernel in some special header.
>IIUC it will be new header file in tools/testing/vsock, which includes such defines. At
>this moment in will contain only VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE. Idea is that such defines

So this only works on the virtio transport though, not the other
transports, right? (but maybe the others don't have this problem, so
it's fine).

>are not supposed to use by user (so do not move it to uapi headers), but needed by tests
>to check kernel behaviour. Please correct me if i'm wrong.

Maybe if it's just one, we can leave it there for now, but with a
comment on top explaining where it comes.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists