From nobody Mon Dec 15 21:49:50 2025 Received: from mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (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 349B2202C2D; Wed, 7 May 2025 11:48:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746618534; cv=none; b=onS2ayec8rjZuaKv3U4WZVaHSJatQoMZ9gEJ7aJMl0ehiZ5SHk28iOWagnPmzPqauBO3lao/TsAP+rMIT1TSEo69xCcc3/1DLfUK9U450GOLUWrc1g6IU1xcp65e266FZeYypCnkD/34zaUbSQwgvSvlsy5quVx97+70Us660jc= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746618534; c=relaxed/simple; bh=c2liinLUBnSwgh4aiW9HpT6+opg8QrsIjZnsRhmMkRo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version; b=a4jVHVddrBF0vAuHbkB20sVBGLaRJ124TaVBpzTcRnHfhAlA2PQbMzWfoKlFG3d2VBx8VxMNsbI0ob6ReE5FpuKLrJNJQ5xXK2pr9s6+oCPr9SyVYzkwXqKc/kFjwrLM8R7yknFBj66oubjz322oBb0RTWZP6Jkk46zLDo7Zfro= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b=Qo0+q8uO; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.163.158.5 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ibm.com header.i=@ibm.com header.b="Qo0+q8uO" Received: from pps.filterd (m0353725.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 547BE9IS017730; Wed, 7 May 2025 11:48:49 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:date:from:message-id:mime-version :subject:to; s=pp1; bh=cULoZ7kaOPQj0/FlnNdSAt+/VqKG2GcHgg3mJovbe XQ=; b=Qo0+q8uOIn1eT/oLZ02NTkwJvdXeWA6jNwU8e8TqoLPmvqACieyGtLicY a3BC1dabbGQIWi+G+Y3PnC/OxnImPDgfo27H0N+Ckcwm/0sR6BFB/5B1mOKNDEBD va9Zwc02ofDtnKvKh+E72TBzc+2/7EuESILUxUF5c/hQj61DBGXE92kpRe/GROf0 leZjeQAoyuWE5dpq5zYR9feCNAZx/aBEvRcCRh2FuU0Xf2behQGrrQj3QVoPM8mX LNdUvD1iBmvGpNapQnLrCfkZ9/csXHuRzLqbcNd+Xkkm6MbYNPxZgOxnsBTkVZjG VOk9FL7a1/A/94jVQ/ZF0N1zACAAw== Received: from ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (5b.69.3da9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.61.105.91]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 46fvd0jt84-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 07 May 2025 11:48:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 5478Vm1R002728; Wed, 7 May 2025 11:48:48 GMT Received: from smtprelay04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com ([172.16.1.71]) by ppma21.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 46dxfp0g3a-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 07 May 2025 11:48:48 +0000 Received: from smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com [10.241.53.105]) by smtprelay04.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 547BmkPS63439152 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 7 May 2025 11:48:47 GMT Received: from smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B069958059; Wed, 7 May 2025 11:48:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F65958043; Wed, 7 May 2025 11:48:46 +0000 (GMT) Received: from WIN-DU0DFC9G5VV.austin.ibm.com (unknown [9.41.105.251]) by smtpav06.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Wed, 7 May 2025 11:48:46 +0000 (GMT) From: Konstantin Shkolnyy To: sgarzare@redhat.com Cc: virtualization@lists.linux.dev, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mjrosato@linux.ibm.com, Konstantin Shkolnyy Subject: [PATCH net] vsock/test: Fix occasional failure in SIOCOUTQ tests Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 06:48:33 -0500 Message-Id: <20250507114833.2503676-1-kshk@linux.ibm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: nCLsIGQN4p3M4hHIR0-xue-DU42wrGOL X-Proofpoint-GUID: nCLsIGQN4p3M4hHIR0-xue-DU42wrGOL X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=LYc86ifi c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=681b48a0 cx=c_pps a=GFwsV6G8L6GxiO2Y/PsHdQ==:117 a=GFwsV6G8L6GxiO2Y/PsHdQ==:17 a=dt9VzEwgFbYA:10 a=VnNF1IyMAAAA:8 a=Kg6wQDg3F1ofPJjr4V4A:9 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjUwNTA3MDEwOSBTYWx0ZWRfX8/UrslnoiAch eyR4G/yJjy8azLUOPE7yv8+ITj7gwrBOMe1/7RVZ23r/2fXllH7HTL/ZiXwScPwqVBSbaS8pOFo xv15Odjum/qXFHLEaNSTNuAjOgXwogDyNrlweOdoxcvlpltpktK6btW5gdbbzKzcUL3b/Mm82Na 0aMEjrfLCOBbPZ+w0q+6a0QtgfreYVpnYBApnSB6bf7wPUq1r3hSzPxd8A0ldqqcF+vgbl2cg99 9w82Kpy4MPSponuE3R+0/d8mmbInZispDrVCVlGZHLI321SaPtZfVXfbY4D7Hnxkiig48P5+JMQ Vts1jitkE1HamyEB9c8Z8CvEa/itvepy4aFz2m4N8dCeZ/Dgn8TrW8Pyq9ngnt32/Y2jEK0jtWC By0ItQ/OCxjD8gvrmFedc0SnVhMHOZkE9CVns3KEv8Z6o/IgzsapW08k6TcfNmpou6hFp+5e X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1099,Hydra:6.0.736,FMLib:17.12.80.40 definitions=2025-05-07_03,2025-05-06_01,2025-02-21_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 mlxlogscore=999 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 priorityscore=1501 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 classifier=spam authscore=0 authtc=n/a authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.19.0-2504070000 definitions=main-2505070109 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" These tests: "SOCK_STREAM ioctl(SIOCOUTQ) 0 unsent bytes" "SOCK_SEQPACKET ioctl(SIOCOUTQ) 0 unsent bytes" output: "Unexpected 'SIOCOUTQ' value, expected 0, got 64 (CLIENT)". They test that the SIOCOUTQ ioctl reports 0 unsent bytes after the data have been received by the other side. However, sometimes there is a delay in updating this "unsent bytes" counter, and the test fails even though the counter properly goes to 0 several milliseconds later. The delay occurs in the kernel because the used buffer notification callback virtio_vsock_tx_done(), called upon receipt of the data by the other side, doesn't update the counter itself. It delegates that to a kernel thread (via vsock->tx_work). Sometimes that thread is delayed more than the test expects. Change the test to try SIOCOUTQ several times with small delays in between. Signed-off-by: Konstantin Shkolnyy --- tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_t= est.c index d0f6d253ac72..143f1cba2d18 100644 --- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c +++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c @@ -1264,21 +1264,27 @@ static void test_unsent_bytes_client(const struct t= est_opts *opts, int type) send_buf(fd, buf, sizeof(buf), 0, sizeof(buf)); control_expectln("RECEIVED"); =20 - ret =3D ioctl(fd, SIOCOUTQ, &sock_bytes_unsent); - if (ret < 0) { - if (errno =3D=3D EOPNOTSUPP) { - fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n"); - } else { + /* SIOCOUTQ isn't guaranteed to instantly track sent data */ + for (int i =3D 0; i < 10; i++) { + ret =3D ioctl(fd, SIOCOUTQ, &sock_bytes_unsent); + if (ret =3D=3D 0 && sock_bytes_unsent =3D=3D 0) + goto success; + + if (ret < 0) { + if (errno =3D=3D EOPNOTSUPP) { + fprintf(stderr, "Test skipped, SIOCOUTQ not supported.\n"); + goto success; + } perror("ioctl"); exit(EXIT_FAILURE); } - } else if (ret =3D=3D 0 && sock_bytes_unsent !=3D 0) { - fprintf(stderr, - "Unexpected 'SIOCOUTQ' value, expected 0, got %i\n", - sock_bytes_unsent); - exit(EXIT_FAILURE); + usleep(10 * 1000); } =20 + fprintf(stderr, "Unexpected 'SIOCOUTQ' value, expected 0, got %i\n", + sock_bytes_unsent); + exit(EXIT_FAILURE); +success: close(fd); } =20 --=20 2.34.1