From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 372B2C25B08 for ; Thu, 4 Aug 2022 23:44:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S240225AbiHDXoz (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2022 19:44:55 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50988 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233937AbiHDXox (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2022 19:44:53 -0400 Received: from mail-qv1-xf2a.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE3B070E55; Thu, 4 Aug 2022 16:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf2a.google.com with SMTP id b7so767810qvq.2; Thu, 04 Aug 2022 16:44:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=HVkR14o42hi6hJ+phzjown/t9tdn1qa9dzhn9JkAgYE=; b=FUPBygbQUj/wdWVItvPxp+dnHVAGcLFC/JxkbBQs+3cZoWgmaCxQKmzffYZLmcQnV+ 6EsQGI7fvIAnuFhhox7dtWTgwYdlChzNl1MAwCvHQE97b/YiRxEZMtvxuPqp+62JwORZ GhgOWMepuqTBL9OCkHEGU5AbEMFeNp/dTBiGos5+dXLso5bPexe22yphqS8xzAPuWML8 6PGw7RVkDeU53Md4N8kfOhWvWxsXb4JFDlyIF3f2PGCtWbuhPzSYCL0IePbjaIwjMzXM 2leMfvDjyFC096vb26dys74XEezet50ye4/YrZZGDMn1Dc+OPZ0gkixG2xWy1u9PRA3s fviA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=HVkR14o42hi6hJ+phzjown/t9tdn1qa9dzhn9JkAgYE=; b=i46VcGw8w91iLi4lvRQPG6i26BbTLDCwFh9DxyKoUAP5/QJKVRyvj6sFiQ88XaSnYS 9cNMrV2d7Jv+eReOUn7BI5qvm0J8XUwtfyAIL4iRLebO38gK5h0ezNRHDU6sAOy1sgM1 2kMXjzP0pA7t2K32WtZkWvHUgWsgWpb8naaxdh1APbbRPPAlHKQT2tS3jypgBXs/2qVq fQnVCmEJlIyYUNw4TEXXMVE6W6678743pLVvz4JhCEm8Ue/5gRey7mFMIqoJDSVemoSU HZrxyvbeqB/jVzYAb0PCINhq0x1w+AbX5uokYCHLfZ77THnjOISM7lK0RqLg6nzxQFPY lm4w== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo3HbDZjZG54YIz1iXQ/zuLADgum5Ov7y2h3TE9iWVb/LSgsDH50 +y5BID5ZwMT+MLfrjGBCVg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR46IBnjSSMjNG8eh7tClgbT4ZO9RhxTMgsNzmRC8MWOIN/iv0pnXymVkhOmG2qUgWy6nn1jtQ== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4ea9:0:b0:474:7389:8593 with SMTP id ed9-20020ad44ea9000000b0047473898593mr3820374qvb.94.1659656692012; Thu, 04 Aug 2022 16:44:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bytedance (ec2-52-52-7-82.us-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com. [52.52.7.82]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e13-20020a05622a110d00b00339163a06fcsm1721967qty.6.2022.08.04.16.44.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 04 Aug 2022 16:44:51 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2022 16:44:47 -0700 From: Peilin Ye To: Stefano Garzarella Cc: "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Peilin Ye , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] vsock: Reschedule connect_work for O_NONBLOCK connect() requests Message-ID: <20220804234447.GA2294@bytedance> References: <20220804020925.32167-1-yepeilin.cs@gmail.com> <20220804065923.66bor7cyxwk2bwsf@sgarzare-redhat> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220804065923.66bor7cyxwk2bwsf@sgarzare-redhat> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Stefano, On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 08:59:23AM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > The last thing I was trying to figure out before sending the patch was > whether to set sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED in vsock_connect_timeout(). > > I think we should do that, otherwise a subsequent to connect() with > O_NONBLOCK set would keep returning -EALREADY, even though the timeout has > expired. > > What do you think? Thanks for bringing this up, after thinking about sock->state, I have 3 thoughts: 1. I think the root cause of this memleak is, we keep @connect_work pending, even after the 2nd, blocking request times out (or gets interrupted) and sets sock->state back to SS_UNCONNECTED. @connect_work is effectively no-op when sk->sk_state is TCP_CLOS{E,ING} anyway, so why not we just cancel @connect_work when blocking requests time out or get interrupted? Something like: diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c index f04abf662ec6..62628af84164 100644 --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -1402,6 +1402,9 @@ static int vsock_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *addr, lock_sock(sk); if (signal_pending(current)) { + if (cancel_delayed_work(&vsk->connect_work)) + sock_put(sk); + err = sock_intr_errno(timeout); sk->sk_state = sk->sk_state == TCP_ESTABLISHED ? TCP_CLOSING : TCP_CLOSE; sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; @@ -1409,6 +1412,9 @@ static int vsock_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *addr, vsock_remove_connected(vsk); goto out_wait; } else if (timeout == 0) { + if (cancel_delayed_work(&vsk->connect_work)) + sock_put(sk); + err = -ETIMEDOUT; sk->sk_state = TCP_CLOSE; sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; Then no need to worry about rescheduling @connect_work, and the state machine becomes more accurate. What do you think? I will ask syzbot to test this. 2. About your suggestion of setting sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED in vsock_connect_timeout(), I think it makes sense. Are you going to send a net-next patch for this? 3. After a TCP_SYN_SENT sock receives VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_RESPONSE in virtio_transport_recv_connecting(), why don't we cancel @connect_work? Am I missing something? Thanks, Peilin Ye