Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 11 Aug 2021 11:06:07 +0200
From:   Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
To:     Arseny Krasnov <arseny.krasnov@kaspersky.com>
Cc:     Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Jorgen Hansen <jhansen@vmware.com>,
        Norbert Slusarek <nslusarek@gmx.net>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>,
        Andra Paraschiv <andraprs@amazon.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stsp2@yandex.ru, oxffffaa@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 2/5] vhost/vsock: support MSG_EOR bit processing
Message-ID: <20210811090607.bl3cjsjrsg2ss7dp@steredhat>
References: <20210810113901.1214116-1-arseny.krasnov@kaspersky.com>
 <20210810114018.1214619-1-arseny.krasnov@kaspersky.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210810114018.1214619-1-arseny.krasnov@kaspersky.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 02:40:15PM +0300, Arseny Krasnov wrote:
>It works in the same way as 'end-of-message' bit: if packet has
>'EOM' bit, also check for 'EOR' bit.

Please describe all changes, e.g. the new variable to accumulate flags 
to restore.

>
>Signed-off-by: Arseny Krasnov <arseny.krasnov@kaspersky.com>
>---
> drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 12 ++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c
>index feaf650affbe..06fc132b13c8 100644
>--- a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c
>+++ b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c
>@@ -114,7 +114,7 @@ vhost_transport_do_send_pkt(struct vhost_vsock *vsock,
> 		size_t nbytes;
> 		size_t iov_len, payload_len;
> 		int head;
>-		bool restore_flag = false;
>+		uint32_t flags_to_restore = 0;
>
> 		spin_lock_bh(&vsock->send_pkt_list_lock);
> 		if (list_empty(&vsock->send_pkt_list)) {
>@@ -187,7 +187,12 @@ vhost_transport_do_send_pkt(struct vhost_vsock *vsock,
> 			 */
> 			if (le32_to_cpu(pkt->hdr.flags) & VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOM) {
> 				pkt->hdr.flags &= ~cpu_to_le32(VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOM);
>-				restore_flag = true;
>+				flags_to_restore |= le32_to_cpu(VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOM);
>+
>+				if (le32_to_cpu(pkt->hdr.flags & VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOR)) {
>+					pkt->hdr.flags &= ~cpu_to_le32(VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOR);
>+					flags_to_restore |= le32_to_cpu(VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOR);
                                                             ^
I'm not sure this is needed, VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOR is represented in the 
cpu endianess.

I think here you can simpy do `flags_to_restore |= VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOR` 
then use `pkt->hdr.flags |= cpu_to_le32(flags_to_restore);` as you 
already do.

>+				}
> 			}
> 		}
>
>@@ -224,8 +229,7 @@ vhost_transport_do_send_pkt(struct vhost_vsock *vsock,
> 		 * to send it with the next available buffer.
> 		 */
> 		if (pkt->off < pkt->len) {
>-			if (restore_flag)
>-				pkt->hdr.flags |= cpu_to_le32(VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOM);
>+			pkt->hdr.flags |= cpu_to_le32(flags_to_restore);
>
> 			/* We are queueing the same virtio_vsock_pkt to handle
> 			 * the remaining bytes, and we want to deliver it
>-- 
>2.25.1
>