[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <08096620-5c6f-4e39-b5e4-6061ab8fc0a8@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2024 21:20:40 +0800
From: Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: liqiang <liqiang64@...wei.com>, wenjia@...ux.ibm.com, jaka@...ux.ibm.com,
alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com, tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com
Cc: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, luanjianhai@...wei.com,
zhangxuzhou4@...wei.com, dengguangxing@...wei.com, gaochao24@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] Enter smc_tx_wait when the tx length exceeds
the available space
On 2024/12/26 20:22, liqiang wrote:
> The variable send_done records the number of bytes that have been
> successfully sent in the context of the code. It is more reasonable
> to rename it to sent_bytes here.
>
> Another modification point is that if the ring buf is full after
> sendmsg has sent part of the data, the current code will return
> directly without entering smc_tx_wait, so the judgment of send_done
> in front of smc_tx_wait is removed.
>
> Signed-off-by: liqiang <liqiang64@...wei.com>
> ---
Hi liqiang,
I think this discussion thread[1] can help you understand why this is the case.
The current design is to avoid the stalled connection problem.
Some other small points: issues should be posted to 'net' tree instead of 'net-next'
tree[2], and currently net-next is closed[3].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20211027085208.16048-2-tonylu@linux.alibaba.com/
[2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/netdev-FAQ.txt
[3] https://patchwork.hopto.org/net-next.html
Regards.
> net/smc/smc_tx.c | 14 ++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/smc/smc_tx.c b/net/smc/smc_tx.c
> index 214ac3cbcf9a..6ecabc10793c 100644
> --- a/net/smc/smc_tx.c
> +++ b/net/smc/smc_tx.c
> @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static bool smc_tx_should_cork(struct smc_sock *smc, struct msghdr *msg)
> */
> int smc_tx_sendmsg(struct smc_sock *smc, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
> {
> - size_t copylen, send_done = 0, send_remaining = len;
> + size_t copylen, sent_bytes = 0, send_remaining = len;
> size_t chunk_len, chunk_off, chunk_len_sum;
> struct smc_connection *conn = &smc->conn;
> union smc_host_cursor prep;
> @@ -216,14 +216,12 @@ int smc_tx_sendmsg(struct smc_sock *smc, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
> conn->killed)
> return -EPIPE;
> if (smc_cdc_rxed_any_close(conn))
> - return send_done ?: -ECONNRESET;
> + return sent_bytes ?: -ECONNRESET;
>
> if (msg->msg_flags & MSG_OOB)
> conn->local_tx_ctrl.prod_flags.urg_data_pending = 1;
>
> if (!atomic_read(&conn->sndbuf_space) || conn->urg_tx_pend) {
> - if (send_done)
> - return send_done;
> rc = smc_tx_wait(smc, msg->msg_flags);
> if (rc)
> goto out_err;
> @@ -250,11 +248,11 @@ int smc_tx_sendmsg(struct smc_sock *smc, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
> msg, chunk_len);
> if (rc) {
> smc_sndbuf_sync_sg_for_device(conn);
> - if (send_done)
> - return send_done;
> + if (sent_bytes)
> + return sent_bytes;
> goto out_err;
> }
> - send_done += chunk_len;
> + sent_bytes += chunk_len;
> send_remaining -= chunk_len;
>
> if (chunk_len_sum == copylen)
> @@ -287,7 +285,7 @@ int smc_tx_sendmsg(struct smc_sock *smc, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len)
> trace_smc_tx_sendmsg(smc, copylen);
> } /* while (msg_data_left(msg)) */
>
> - return send_done;
> + return sent_bytes;
>
> out_err:
> rc = sk_stream_error(sk, msg->msg_flags, rc);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists