Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <26d43c65-1f23-5b83-6377-3327854387c4@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Tue, 24 May 2022 14:04:06 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2] net/smc: align the connect behaviour with TCP
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Guangguan Wang <guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com>,
        davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com
Cc:     linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20220513022453.7256-1-guangguan.wang@linux.alibaba.com>
 <3f0405e7-d92b-e8d0-cc61-b25a11644264@linux.ibm.com>
 <45a19f8b-1b64-3459-c28c-aebab4fd8f1e@linux.alibaba.com>
From:   Karsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>
Organization: IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
In-Reply-To: <45a19f8b-1b64-3459-c28c-aebab4fd8f1e@linux.alibaba.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 24/05/2022 04:59, Guangguan Wang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2022/5/23 20:24, Karsten Graul wrote:
>> On 13/05/2022 04:24, 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>
>>> Acked-by: Karsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>
>>> ---
>>>  net/smc/af_smc.c | 50 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>>  1 file changed, 46 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c
>>> index fce16b9d6e1a..5f70642a8044 100644
>>> --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c
>>> +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c
>>> @@ -1544,9 +1544,29 @@ 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)
>>> +			goto connected;
>>
>> I stumbled over this when thinking about the fallback processing. If for whatever reason
>> fallback==true during smc_connect(), the "if (smc->use_fallback)" below would set sock->state
>> to e.g. SS_CONNECTED. But in the fallback case sk_state keeps SMC_INIT. So during the next call
>> the SS_CONNECTING case above would break because sk_state in NOT SMC_ACTIVE, and we would end
>> up calling kernel_connect() again. Which seems to be no problem when kernel_connect() returns 
>> -EISCONN and we return this to the caller. But is this how it should work, or does it work by chance?
>>
> 
> Since the sk_state keeps SMC_INIT and does not correctly indicate the state of clcsock, it should end
> up calling kernel_connect() again to get the actual connection state of clcsock.
> 
> And I'm sorry there is a problem that if sock->state==SS_CONNECTED and sk_state==SMC_INIT, further call
> of smc_connect will return -EINVAL where -EISCONN is preferred. 
> The steps to reproduce:
> 1）switch fallback before connect, such as setsockopt TCP_FASTOPEN
> 2）connect with noblocking and returns -EINPROGRESS. (sock->state changes to SS_CONNECTING)
> 3) end up calling connect with noblocking again and returns 0. (kernel_connect() returns 0 and sock->state changes to
>    SS_CONNECTED but sk->sk_state stays SMC_INIT)
> 4) call connect again, maybe by mistake, will return -EINVAL, but -EISCONN is preferred.
> 
> What do you think about if we synchronize the sk_state to SMC_ACTIVE instead of keeping SMC_INIT when clcsock
> connected successfully in fallback case described above.
> 
> ...

I start thinking that the fix in 86434744 introduced a problem. Before that fix a connect with
fallback always reached __smc_connect() and on top of that function in case of fallback
smc_connect_fallback() is called, which itself sets sk_state to SMC_ACTIVE.

86434744 removed that code path and I wonder what it actually fixed, because at this time the 
fallback check in __smc_connect() was already present.

Without that "goto out;" the state would be set correctly in smc_connect_fallback(), and the 
socket close processing would work as expected.