From nobody Wed Dec 17 06:01:12 2025 Received: from mailtransmit04.runbox.com (mailtransmit04.runbox.com [185.226.149.37]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F38A4219312; Mon, 21 Apr 2025 21:51:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.226.149.37 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745272286; cv=none; b=i/t5K5FH49FJyWmsv9otkWy8Hq2GtV4FYxX7VpWM2iC5FCVloIKv8QCgOe2+4e52ZDexQMoJTVJSymKcF6p3Iar45ExhDo5nhEmNiCizGVZSHcqzksHQC7OeXl1ZuV8Z8++ETkSY5oD0ONfCARTvyzTGtrmLfMhiure5iNjls+E= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1745272286; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Wse4yBBOfc213KZWiON8OPL4gZVnS7c31xlmnDvSO4w=; h=From:Date:Subject:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-Id:References: In-Reply-To:To:Cc; b=Sgcn/uOH8XNudSmlwbK2++UQjekH6rj4rXuGwtY+S9CghiODXor34ptmLGHmdmnQzFrUHznra5v1ufiLCagj4CpdPk8ki4AY8tvrlivk0Txxsysp457Z7vmE4ZxbrY0PLWnQSsJ2ntFIo/zEHm7Myw+ZVtKTG02pcPGefp2WmBw= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=rbox.co; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rbox.co; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rbox.co header.i=@rbox.co header.b=RSdtqQhT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.226.149.37 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=rbox.co Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=rbox.co Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rbox.co header.i=@rbox.co header.b="RSdtqQhT" Received: from mailtransmit03.runbox ([10.9.9.163] helo=aibo.runbox.com) by mailtransmit04.runbox.com with esmtps (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.93) (envelope-from ) id 1u6z2p-000P7q-PG; Mon, 21 Apr 2025 23:51:15 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rbox.co; s=selector1; h=Cc:To:In-Reply-To:References:Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Subject:Date:From; bh=HCx4RfOmQ7VpHQRdKJQtChL1M92T4VsEIiHTk68PCLs=; b=RSdtqQhT5mo1V22DKp3equpyJt Mayi316SPCexBiAXkHGbYFOQlZaS/ULxVa2zhjE3lIKE01owkliV06slWarjezc2PU6IQOEdb6Hb2 w7uDdWqkyk+/Qtf/8KrhtMZwOBHU1udcQWrBURdx0PfR3bn5qsHxgT0liEC8C+Y7krgrw3JUDUuA4 GB9mY5dxEGgfGP5PLpEyN4SzgVsb40rh1oPGgfWH8+yZRBvJrbD9a553bdjtHf8OPU+qzjdOSfCz6 L9PZJ0vExh74jPCHeK2w6FxM8Pd3Pd0/79BYPqVJwkppO3IhJ653uNYR4lXW4N/HaolCS/PDBo9nD qSNlYSYA==; Received: from [10.9.9.73] (helo=submission02.runbox) by mailtransmit03.runbox with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1u6z2p-0000Nl-F6; Mon, 21 Apr 2025 23:51:15 +0200 Received: by submission02.runbox with esmtpsa [Authenticated ID (604044)] (TLS1.2:ECDHE_SECP256R1__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.93) id 1u6z2h-0056xd-H6; Mon, 21 Apr 2025 23:51:07 +0200 From: Michal Luczaj Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2025 23:50:41 +0200 Subject: [PATCH net-next v2 1/3] vsock: Linger on unsent data Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <20250421-vsock-linger-v2-1-fe9febd64668@rbox.co> References: <20250421-vsock-linger-v2-0-fe9febd64668@rbox.co> In-Reply-To: <20250421-vsock-linger-v2-0-fe9febd64668@rbox.co> To: Stefano Garzarella , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Jason Wang , Xuan Zhuo , =?utf-8?q?Eugenio_P=C3=A9rez?= , Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: virtualization@lists.linux.dev, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Michal Luczaj X-Mailer: b4 0.14.2 Currently vsock's lingering effectively boils down to waiting (or timing out) until packets are consumed or dropped by the peer; be it by receiving the data, closing or shutting down the connection. To align with the semantics described in the SO_LINGER section of man socket(7) and to mimic AF_INET's behaviour more closely, change the logic of a lingering close(): instead of waiting for all data to be handled, block until data is considered sent from the vsock's transport point of view. That is until worker picks the packets for processing and decrements virtio_vsock_sock::bytes_unsent down to 0. Note that such lingering is limited to transports that actually implement vsock_transport::unsent_bytes() callback. This excludes Hyper-V and VMCI, under which no lingering would be observed. The implementation does not adhere strictly to man page's interpretation of SO_LINGER: shutdown() will not trigger the lingering. This follows AF_INET. Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj --- net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 13 +++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio= _transport_common.c index 7f7de6d8809655fe522749fbbc9025df71f071bd..aeb7f3794f7cfc251dde878cb44= fdcc54814c89c 100644 --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c @@ -1196,12 +1196,21 @@ static void virtio_transport_wait_close(struct sock= *sk, long timeout) { if (timeout) { DEFINE_WAIT_FUNC(wait, woken_wake_function); + ssize_t (*unsent)(struct vsock_sock *vsk); + struct vsock_sock *vsk =3D vsock_sk(sk); + + /* Some transports (Hyper-V, VMCI) do not implement + * unsent_bytes. For those, no lingering on close(). + */ + unsent =3D vsk->transport->unsent_bytes; + if (!unsent) + return; =20 add_wait_queue(sk_sleep(sk), &wait); =20 do { - if (sk_wait_event(sk, &timeout, - sock_flag(sk, SOCK_DONE), &wait)) + if (sk_wait_event(sk, &timeout, unsent(vsk) =3D=3D 0, + &wait)) break; } while (!signal_pending(current) && timeout); =20 --=20 2.49.0