Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2023 12:40:00 +0100
From:   Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
To:     Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@sberdevices.ru>
Cc:     Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@bytedance.com>,
        Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
        virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@sberdevices.ru,
        oxffffaa@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/4] several updates to virtio/vsock
Message-ID: <20230310114000.6ptwpryulbvcqf5m@sgarzare-redhat>
References: <1804d100-1652-d463-8627-da93cb61144e@sberdevices.ru>
 <20230310090937.s55af2fx56zn4ewu@sgarzare-redhat>
 <15b9df26-bdc1-e139-8df7-62f966c719ed@sberdevices.ru>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <15b9df26-bdc1-e139-8df7-62f966c719ed@sberdevices.ru>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Mar 10, 2023 at 12:42:13PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>
>
>On 10.03.2023 12:09, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>> Hi Arseniy,
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 09, 2023 at 11:24:42PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> this patchset evolved from previous v2 version (see link below). It does
>>> several updates to virtio/vsock:
>>> 1) Changes 'virtio_transport_inc/dec_rx_pkt()' interface. Now instead of
>>> ? using skbuff state ('head' and 'data' pointers) to update 'fwd_cnt'
>>> ? and 'rx_bytes', integer value is passed as an input argument. This
>>> ? makes code more simple, because in this case we don't need to update
>>> ? skbuff state before calling 'virtio_transport_inc/dec_rx_pkt()'. In
>>> ? more common words - we don't need to change skbuff state to update
>>> ? 'rx_bytes' and 'fwd_cnt' correctly.
>>> 2) For SOCK_STREAM, when copying data to user fails, current skbuff is
>>> ? not dropped. Next read attempt will use same skbuff and last offset.
>>> ? Instead of 'skb_dequeue()', 'skb_peek()' + '__skb_unlink()' are used.
>>> ? This behaviour was implemented before skbuff support.
>>> 3) For SOCK_SEQPACKET it removes unneeded 'skb_pull()' call, because for
>>> ? this type of socket each skbuff is used only once: after removing it
>>> ? from socket's queue, it will be freed anyway.
>>
>> thanks for the fixes, I would wait a few days to see if there are any
>> comments and then I think you can send it on net without RFC.
>>
>> @Bobby if you can take a look, your ack would be appreciated :-)
>Ok, thanks for review. I'll wait for several days and also wait until
>net-next will be opened. Then i'll resend this patchset with net-next

Since they are fixes, they should go with the net tree, not net-next.

Cheers,
Stefano