Message-ID: <d74c1777-645f-82af-fb31-b89021ac6440@sberdevices.ru>
Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2023 15:40:51 +0300
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/102.7.1
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 0/4] several updates to virtio/vsock
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>
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>
References: <1804d100-1652-d463-8627-da93cb61144e@sberdevices.ru>
 <20230310090937.s55af2fx56zn4ewu@sgarzare-redhat>
 <15b9df26-bdc1-e139-8df7-62f966c719ed@sberdevices.ru>
 <20230310114000.6ptwpryulbvcqf5m@sgarzare-redhat>
From:   Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@sberdevices.ru>
In-Reply-To: <20230310114000.6ptwpryulbvcqf5m@sgarzare-redhat>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 10.03.2023 14:40, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> 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.
Ah ok, for net tree i can send it no matter that net-next is closed.

Thanks, Arseniy
> 
> Cheers,
> Stefano
>