* [PATCH net 0/2] net/smc: two fixes for using smc with io_uring
@ 2022-05-09 11:58 Guangguan Wang
2022-05-09 11:58 ` [PATCH net 1/2] net/smc: non blocking recvmsg() return -EAGAIN when no data and signal_pending Guangguan Wang
2022-05-09 11:58 ` [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP Guangguan Wang
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-09 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kgraul, davem, kuba; +Cc: linux-s390, netdev, linux-kernel
This patch set includes two fixes for using smc with io_uring.
Guangguan Wang (2):
net/smc: non blocking recvmsg() return -EAGAIN when no data and
signal_pending
net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP
net/smc/af_smc.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
net/smc/smc_rx.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
--
2.24.3 (Apple Git-128)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [PATCH net 1/2] net/smc: non blocking recvmsg() return -EAGAIN when no data and signal_pending 2022-05-09 11:58 [PATCH net 0/2] net/smc: two fixes for using smc with io_uring Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-09 11:58 ` Guangguan Wang 2022-05-10 3:23 ` Tony Lu 2022-05-09 11:58 ` [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP Guangguan Wang 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-09 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: kgraul, davem, kuba; +Cc: linux-s390, netdev, linux-kernel Non blocking sendmsg will return -EAGAIN when any signal pending and no send space left, while non blocking recvmsg return -EINTR when signal pending and no data received. This may makes confused. As TCP returns -EAGAIN in the conditions descriped above. Align the behavior of smc with TCP. Signed-off-by: Guangguan Wang <guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com> --- net/smc/smc_rx.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/smc/smc_rx.c b/net/smc/smc_rx.c index 51e8eb2933ff..338b9ef806e8 100644 --- a/net/smc/smc_rx.c +++ b/net/smc/smc_rx.c @@ -355,12 +355,12 @@ int smc_rx_recvmsg(struct smc_sock *smc, struct msghdr *msg, } break; } + if (!timeo) + return -EAGAIN; if (signal_pending(current)) { read_done = sock_intr_errno(timeo); break; } - if (!timeo) - return -EAGAIN; } if (!smc_rx_data_available(conn)) { -- 2.24.3 (Apple Git-128) ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net 1/2] net/smc: non blocking recvmsg() return -EAGAIN when no data and signal_pending 2022-05-09 11:58 ` [PATCH net 1/2] net/smc: non blocking recvmsg() return -EAGAIN when no data and signal_pending Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-10 3:23 ` Tony Lu 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Tony Lu @ 2022-05-10 3:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Guangguan Wang; +Cc: kgraul, davem, kuba, linux-s390, netdev, linux-kernel On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 07:58:36PM +0800, Guangguan Wang wrote: > Non blocking sendmsg will return -EAGAIN when any signal pending > and no send space left, while non blocking recvmsg return -EINTR > when signal pending and no data received. This may makes confused. > As TCP returns -EAGAIN in the conditions descriped above. Align the A little typo descriped -> described. > behavior of smc with TCP. I also agree with the behavior of aligning TCP. Fixes tag is preferred: Fixes: 846e344eb722 ("net/smc: add receive timeout check") > Signed-off-by: Guangguan Wang <guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com> Reviewed-by: Tony Lu <tonylu@linux.alibaba.com> Thanks, Tony Lu > --- > net/smc/smc_rx.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/smc/smc_rx.c b/net/smc/smc_rx.c > index 51e8eb2933ff..338b9ef806e8 100644 > --- a/net/smc/smc_rx.c > +++ b/net/smc/smc_rx.c > @@ -355,12 +355,12 @@ int smc_rx_recvmsg(struct smc_sock *smc, struct msghdr *msg, > } > break; > } > + if (!timeo) > + return -EAGAIN; > if (signal_pending(current)) { > read_done = sock_intr_errno(timeo); > break; > } > - if (!timeo) > - return -EAGAIN; > } > > if (!smc_rx_data_available(conn)) { > -- > 2.24.3 (Apple Git-128) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP 2022-05-09 11:58 [PATCH net 0/2] net/smc: two fixes for using smc with io_uring Guangguan Wang 2022-05-09 11:58 ` [PATCH net 1/2] net/smc: non blocking recvmsg() return -EAGAIN when no data and signal_pending Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-09 11:58 ` Guangguan Wang 2022-05-10 9:30 ` Tony Lu 2022-05-10 11:05 ` Paolo Abeni 1 sibling, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-09 11:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: kgraul, davem, kuba; +Cc: linux-s390, netdev, linux-kernel Connect with O_NONBLOCK will not be completed immediately and returns -EINPROGRESS. It is possible to use selector/poll for completion by selecting the socket for writing. After select indicates writability, a second connect function call will return 0 to indicate connected successfully as TCP does, but smc returns -EISCONN. Use socket state for smc to indicate connect state, which can help smc aligning the connect behaviour with TCP. Signed-off-by: Guangguan Wang <guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com> --- net/smc/af_smc.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c index fce16b9d6e1a..45f9f7c6e776 100644 --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c @@ -1544,9 +1544,32 @@ static int smc_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *addr, goto out_err; lock_sock(sk); + switch (sock->state) { + default: + rc = -EINVAL; + goto out; + case SS_CONNECTED: + rc = sk->sk_state == SMC_ACTIVE ? -EISCONN : -EINVAL; + goto out; + case SS_CONNECTING: + if (sk->sk_state == SMC_ACTIVE) { + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; + rc = 0; + goto out; + } + break; + case SS_UNCONNECTED: + sock->state = SS_CONNECTING; + break; + } + switch (sk->sk_state) { default: goto out; + case SMC_CLOSED: + rc = sock_error(sk) ? : -ECONNABORTED; + sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; + goto out; case SMC_ACTIVE: rc = -EISCONN; goto out; @@ -1565,18 +1588,22 @@ static int smc_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *addr, goto out; sock_hold(&smc->sk); /* sock put in passive closing */ - if (smc->use_fallback) + if (smc->use_fallback) { + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; goto out; + } if (flags & O_NONBLOCK) { if (queue_work(smc_hs_wq, &smc->connect_work)) smc->connect_nonblock = 1; rc = -EINPROGRESS; } else { rc = __smc_connect(smc); - if (rc < 0) + if (rc < 0) { goto out; - else + } else { rc = 0; /* success cases including fallback */ + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; + } } out: @@ -1693,6 +1720,7 @@ struct sock *smc_accept_dequeue(struct sock *parent, } if (new_sock) { sock_graft(new_sk, new_sock); + new_sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; if (isk->use_fallback) { smc_sk(new_sk)->clcsock->file = new_sock->file; isk->clcsock->file->private_data = isk->clcsock; @@ -2424,7 +2452,7 @@ static int smc_listen(struct socket *sock, int backlog) rc = -EINVAL; if ((sk->sk_state != SMC_INIT && sk->sk_state != SMC_LISTEN) || - smc->connect_nonblock) + smc->connect_nonblock || sock->state != SS_UNCONNECTED) goto out; rc = 0; @@ -2716,6 +2744,17 @@ static int smc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int how) lock_sock(sk); + if (sock->state == SS_CONNECTING) { + if (sk->sk_state == SMC_ACTIVE) + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; + else if (sk->sk_state == SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT1 || + sk->sk_state == SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT2 || + sk->sk_state == SMC_APPCLOSEWAIT1 || + sk->sk_state == SMC_APPCLOSEWAIT2 || + sk->sk_state == SMC_APPFINCLOSEWAIT) + sock->state = SS_DISCONNECTING; + } + rc = -ENOTCONN; if ((sk->sk_state != SMC_ACTIVE) && (sk->sk_state != SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT1) && @@ -2729,6 +2768,7 @@ static int smc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int how) sk->sk_shutdown = smc->clcsock->sk->sk_shutdown; if (sk->sk_shutdown == SHUTDOWN_MASK) { sk->sk_state = SMC_CLOSED; + sk->sk_socket->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; sock_put(sk); } goto out; @@ -2754,6 +2794,10 @@ static int smc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int how) /* map sock_shutdown_cmd constants to sk_shutdown value range */ sk->sk_shutdown |= how + 1; + if (sk->sk_state == SMC_CLOSED) + sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; + else + sock->state = SS_DISCONNECTING; out: release_sock(sk); return rc ? rc : rc1; @@ -3139,6 +3183,7 @@ static int __smc_create(struct net *net, struct socket *sock, int protocol, rc = -ENOBUFS; sock->ops = &smc_sock_ops; + sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; sk = smc_sock_alloc(net, sock, protocol); if (!sk) goto out; -- 2.24.3 (Apple Git-128) ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP 2022-05-09 11:58 ` [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-10 9:30 ` Tony Lu 2022-05-10 12:58 ` Guangguan Wang 2022-05-10 11:05 ` Paolo Abeni 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Tony Lu @ 2022-05-10 9:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Guangguan Wang; +Cc: kgraul, davem, kuba, linux-s390, netdev, linux-kernel On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 07:58:37PM +0800, Guangguan Wang wrote: > Connect with O_NONBLOCK will not be completed immediately > and returns -EINPROGRESS. It is possible to use selector/poll > for completion by selecting the socket for writing. After select > indicates writability, a second connect function call will return > 0 to indicate connected successfully as TCP does, but smc returns If the connection is established successfully, the following up call of connect() returns -EISCONN (SS_CONNECTED), which is expected and SMC does it, same as TCP. In case of misunderstanding, could you append more detailed information? Thanks, Tony Lu > -EISCONN. Use socket state for smc to indicate connect state, which > can help smc aligning the connect behaviour with TCP. > > Signed-off-by: Guangguan Wang <guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com> > --- > net/smc/af_smc.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c > index fce16b9d6e1a..45f9f7c6e776 100644 > --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c > +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c > @@ -1544,9 +1544,32 @@ static int smc_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *addr, > goto out_err; > > lock_sock(sk); > + switch (sock->state) { > + default: > + rc = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + case SS_CONNECTED: > + rc = sk->sk_state == SMC_ACTIVE ? -EISCONN : -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + case SS_CONNECTING: > + if (sk->sk_state == SMC_ACTIVE) { > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > + rc = 0; > + goto out; > + } > + break; > + case SS_UNCONNECTED: > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTING; > + break; > + } > + > switch (sk->sk_state) { > default: > goto out; > + case SMC_CLOSED: > + rc = sock_error(sk) ? : -ECONNABORTED; > + sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; > + goto out; > case SMC_ACTIVE: > rc = -EISCONN; > goto out; > @@ -1565,18 +1588,22 @@ static int smc_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *addr, > goto out; > > sock_hold(&smc->sk); /* sock put in passive closing */ > - if (smc->use_fallback) > + if (smc->use_fallback) { > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > goto out; > + } > if (flags & O_NONBLOCK) { > if (queue_work(smc_hs_wq, &smc->connect_work)) > smc->connect_nonblock = 1; > rc = -EINPROGRESS; > } else { > rc = __smc_connect(smc); > - if (rc < 0) > + if (rc < 0) { > goto out; > - else > + } else { > rc = 0; /* success cases including fallback */ > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > + } > } > > out: > @@ -1693,6 +1720,7 @@ struct sock *smc_accept_dequeue(struct sock *parent, > } > if (new_sock) { > sock_graft(new_sk, new_sock); > + new_sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > if (isk->use_fallback) { > smc_sk(new_sk)->clcsock->file = new_sock->file; > isk->clcsock->file->private_data = isk->clcsock; > @@ -2424,7 +2452,7 @@ static int smc_listen(struct socket *sock, int backlog) > > rc = -EINVAL; > if ((sk->sk_state != SMC_INIT && sk->sk_state != SMC_LISTEN) || > - smc->connect_nonblock) > + smc->connect_nonblock || sock->state != SS_UNCONNECTED) > goto out; > > rc = 0; > @@ -2716,6 +2744,17 @@ static int smc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int how) > > lock_sock(sk); > > + if (sock->state == SS_CONNECTING) { > + if (sk->sk_state == SMC_ACTIVE) > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > + else if (sk->sk_state == SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT1 || > + sk->sk_state == SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT2 || > + sk->sk_state == SMC_APPCLOSEWAIT1 || > + sk->sk_state == SMC_APPCLOSEWAIT2 || > + sk->sk_state == SMC_APPFINCLOSEWAIT) > + sock->state = SS_DISCONNECTING; > + } > + > rc = -ENOTCONN; > if ((sk->sk_state != SMC_ACTIVE) && > (sk->sk_state != SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT1) && > @@ -2729,6 +2768,7 @@ static int smc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int how) > sk->sk_shutdown = smc->clcsock->sk->sk_shutdown; > if (sk->sk_shutdown == SHUTDOWN_MASK) { > sk->sk_state = SMC_CLOSED; > + sk->sk_socket->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; > sock_put(sk); > } > goto out; > @@ -2754,6 +2794,10 @@ static int smc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int how) > /* map sock_shutdown_cmd constants to sk_shutdown value range */ > sk->sk_shutdown |= how + 1; > > + if (sk->sk_state == SMC_CLOSED) > + sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; > + else > + sock->state = SS_DISCONNECTING; > out: > release_sock(sk); > return rc ? rc : rc1; > @@ -3139,6 +3183,7 @@ static int __smc_create(struct net *net, struct socket *sock, int protocol, > > rc = -ENOBUFS; > sock->ops = &smc_sock_ops; > + sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; > sk = smc_sock_alloc(net, sock, protocol); > if (!sk) > goto out; > -- > 2.24.3 (Apple Git-128) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP 2022-05-10 9:30 ` Tony Lu @ 2022-05-10 12:58 ` Guangguan Wang 2022-05-11 13:32 ` Tony Lu 0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-10 12:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Tony Lu; +Cc: kgraul, davem, kuba, linux-s390, netdev, linux-kernel On 2022/5/10 17:30, Tony Lu wrote: > On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 07:58:37PM +0800, Guangguan Wang wrote: >> Connect with O_NONBLOCK will not be completed immediately >> and returns -EINPROGRESS. It is possible to use selector/poll >> for completion by selecting the socket for writing. After select >> indicates writability, a second connect function call will return >> 0 to indicate connected successfully as TCP does, but smc returns > > If the connection is established successfully, the following up call of > connect() returns -EISCONN (SS_CONNECTED), which is expected and SMC > does it, same as TCP. > > In case of misunderstanding, could you append more detailed information? > > Thanks, > Tony Lu > io_uring uses nonblocking connect as follow steps: 1) call connect with nonblocking 2) wait for selector/poll to indicate writability 3) call connect to confirm connection's state In the third step, tcp changes the socket state from SS_CONNECTING to SS_CONNECTED and returns 0 if the connection is established successfully, but smc returns -EISCONN. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP 2022-05-10 12:58 ` Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-11 13:32 ` Tony Lu 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Tony Lu @ 2022-05-11 13:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Guangguan Wang; +Cc: kgraul, davem, kuba, linux-s390, netdev, linux-kernel On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 08:58:38PM +0800, Guangguan Wang wrote: > > > On 2022/5/10 17:30, Tony Lu wrote: > > On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 07:58:37PM +0800, Guangguan Wang wrote: > >> Connect with O_NONBLOCK will not be completed immediately > >> and returns -EINPROGRESS. It is possible to use selector/poll > >> for completion by selecting the socket for writing. After select > >> indicates writability, a second connect function call will return > >> 0 to indicate connected successfully as TCP does, but smc returns > > > > If the connection is established successfully, the following up call of > > connect() returns -EISCONN (SS_CONNECTED), which is expected and SMC > > does it, same as TCP. > > > > In case of misunderstanding, could you append more detailed information? > > > > Thanks, > > Tony Lu > > > > io_uring uses nonblocking connect as follow steps: > 1) call connect with nonblocking > 2) wait for selector/poll to indicate writability > 3) call connect to confirm connection's state > > In the third step, tcp changes the socket state from SS_CONNECTING to > SS_CONNECTED and returns 0 if the connection is established successfully, > but smc returns -EISCONN. Based on the steps you list, I am wondering if it is finished in the step #1, the call of connect() in step #3 would return -EISCONN. Should we check 0 and -EISCONN in step #3? To fix this issue, I think we should be careful about adding and handling sock state, maybe we could push it to net-next and take advantage of sock state. And I will test this patch later in our test cases. Thanks, Tony Lu ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP 2022-05-09 11:58 ` [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP Guangguan Wang 2022-05-10 9:30 ` Tony Lu @ 2022-05-10 11:05 ` Paolo Abeni 2022-05-10 13:03 ` Guangguan Wang 1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread From: Paolo Abeni @ 2022-05-10 11:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Guangguan Wang, kgraul, davem, kuba; +Cc: linux-s390, netdev, linux-kernel On Mon, 2022-05-09 at 19:58 +0800, Guangguan Wang wrote: > Connect with O_NONBLOCK will not be completed immediately > and returns -EINPROGRESS. It is possible to use selector/poll > for completion by selecting the socket for writing. After select > indicates writability, a second connect function call will return > 0 to indicate connected successfully as TCP does, but smc returns > -EISCONN. Use socket state for smc to indicate connect state, which > can help smc aligning the connect behaviour with TCP. > > Signed-off-by: Guangguan Wang <guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com> > --- > net/smc/af_smc.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 file changed, 49 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c > index fce16b9d6e1a..45f9f7c6e776 100644 > --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c > +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c > @@ -1544,9 +1544,32 @@ static int smc_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *addr, > goto out_err; > > lock_sock(sk); > + switch (sock->state) { > + default: > + rc = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + case SS_CONNECTED: > + rc = sk->sk_state == SMC_ACTIVE ? -EISCONN : -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + case SS_CONNECTING: > + if (sk->sk_state == SMC_ACTIVE) { > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > + rc = 0; > + goto out; > + } > + break; > + case SS_UNCONNECTED: > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTING; > + break; > + } > + > switch (sk->sk_state) { > default: > goto out; > + case SMC_CLOSED: > + rc = sock_error(sk) ? : -ECONNABORTED; > + sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; > + goto out; > case SMC_ACTIVE: > rc = -EISCONN; > goto out; > @@ -1565,18 +1588,22 @@ static int smc_connect(struct socket *sock, struct sockaddr *addr, > goto out; > > sock_hold(&smc->sk); /* sock put in passive closing */ > - if (smc->use_fallback) > + if (smc->use_fallback) { > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > goto out; > + } > if (flags & O_NONBLOCK) { > if (queue_work(smc_hs_wq, &smc->connect_work)) > smc->connect_nonblock = 1; > rc = -EINPROGRESS; > } else { > rc = __smc_connect(smc); > - if (rc < 0) > + if (rc < 0) { > goto out; > - else > + } else { > rc = 0; /* success cases including fallback */ > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; 'else' is not needed here, you can keep the above 2 statements dropping an indentation level. > + } > } > You can avoid a little code duplication adding here the following: connected: sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; and using the new label where appropriate. > out: > @@ -1693,6 +1720,7 @@ struct sock *smc_accept_dequeue(struct sock *parent, > } > if (new_sock) { > sock_graft(new_sk, new_sock); > + new_sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > if (isk->use_fallback) { > smc_sk(new_sk)->clcsock->file = new_sock->file; > isk->clcsock->file->private_data = isk->clcsock; > @@ -2424,7 +2452,7 @@ static int smc_listen(struct socket *sock, int backlog) > > rc = -EINVAL; > if ((sk->sk_state != SMC_INIT && sk->sk_state != SMC_LISTEN) || > - smc->connect_nonblock) > + smc->connect_nonblock || sock->state != SS_UNCONNECTED) > goto out; > > rc = 0; > @@ -2716,6 +2744,17 @@ static int smc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int how) > > lock_sock(sk); > > + if (sock->state == SS_CONNECTING) { > + if (sk->sk_state == SMC_ACTIVE) > + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > + else if (sk->sk_state == SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT1 || > + sk->sk_state == SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT2 || > + sk->sk_state == SMC_APPCLOSEWAIT1 || > + sk->sk_state == SMC_APPCLOSEWAIT2 || > + sk->sk_state == SMC_APPFINCLOSEWAIT) > + sock->state = SS_DISCONNECTING; > + } > + > rc = -ENOTCONN; > if ((sk->sk_state != SMC_ACTIVE) && > (sk->sk_state != SMC_PEERCLOSEWAIT1) && > @@ -2729,6 +2768,7 @@ static int smc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int how) > sk->sk_shutdown = smc->clcsock->sk->sk_shutdown; > if (sk->sk_shutdown == SHUTDOWN_MASK) { > sk->sk_state = SMC_CLOSED; > + sk->sk_socket->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; > sock_put(sk); > } > goto out; > @@ -2754,6 +2794,10 @@ static int smc_shutdown(struct socket *sock, int how) > /* map sock_shutdown_cmd constants to sk_shutdown value range */ > sk->sk_shutdown |= how + 1; > > + if (sk->sk_state == SMC_CLOSED) > + sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; > + else > + sock->state = SS_DISCONNECTING; > out: > release_sock(sk); > return rc ? rc : rc1; > @@ -3139,6 +3183,7 @@ static int __smc_create(struct net *net, struct socket *sock, int protocol, > > rc = -ENOBUFS; > sock->ops = &smc_sock_ops; > + sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED; > sk = smc_sock_alloc(net, sock, protocol); > if (!sk) > goto out; ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP 2022-05-10 11:05 ` Paolo Abeni @ 2022-05-10 13:03 ` Guangguan Wang 0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread From: Guangguan Wang @ 2022-05-10 13:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Paolo Abeni; +Cc: kgraul, davem, kuba, linux-s390, netdev, linux-kernel On 2022/5/10 19:05, Paolo Abeni wrote: >> } else { >> rc = __smc_connect(smc); >> - if (rc < 0) >> + if (rc < 0) { >> goto out; >> - else >> + } else { >> rc = 0; /* success cases including fallback */ >> + sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > > 'else' is not needed here, you can keep the above 2 statements dropping > an indentation level. > >> + } >> } >> > > You can avoid a little code duplication adding here the following: > > connected: > sock->state = SS_CONNECTED; > > and using the new label where appropriate. > Got it, I will modify it in the next version. Thanks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-05-11 13:32 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-05-09 11:58 [PATCH net 0/2] net/smc: two fixes for using smc with io_uring Guangguan Wang 2022-05-09 11:58 ` [PATCH net 1/2] net/smc: non blocking recvmsg() return -EAGAIN when no data and signal_pending Guangguan Wang 2022-05-10 3:23 ` Tony Lu 2022-05-09 11:58 ` [PATCH net 2/2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP Guangguan Wang 2022-05-10 9:30 ` Tony Lu 2022-05-10 12:58 ` Guangguan Wang 2022-05-11 13:32 ` Tony Lu 2022-05-10 11:05 ` Paolo Abeni 2022-05-10 13:03 ` Guangguan Wang
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).