On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 05:22:13PM +0100, Stefano
Brivio wrote:
On Thu, 12 Oct 2023 12:51:13 +1100
David Gibson <david(a)gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
tcp_splice_destroy() has some close-to-duplicated
logic handling closing of
the socket and ipies for each side of the connection. We can use a loop
^^^^^ pipes
Oops, fixed.
across
the sides to reduce the duplication.
Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david(a)gibson.dropbear.id.au>
---
tcp_splice.c | 32 ++++++++++++++------------------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tcp_splice.c b/tcp_splice.c
index 99ef8a4..239f6d2 100644
--- a/tcp_splice.c
+++ b/tcp_splice.c
@@ -258,30 +258,26 @@ void tcp_splice_conn_update(const struct ctx *c, struct
tcp_splice_conn *new)
void tcp_splice_destroy(struct ctx *c, union tcp_conn *conn_union)
{
struct tcp_splice_conn *conn = &conn_union->splice;
+ int side;
- if (conn->events & SPLICE_ESTABLISHED) {
- /* Flushing might need to block: don't recycle them. */
- if (conn->pipe[0][0] != -1) {
- close(conn->pipe[0][0]);
- close(conn->pipe[0][1]);
- conn->pipe[0][0] = conn->pipe[0][1] = -1;
+ for (side = 0; side < SIDES; side++) {
+ if (conn->events & SPLICE_ESTABLISHED) {
+ /* Flushing might need to block: don't recycle them. */
+ if (conn->pipe[side][0] != -1) {
+ close(conn->pipe[side][0]);
+ close(conn->pipe[side][1]);
+ conn->pipe[side][0] = conn->pipe[side][1] = -1;
+ }
}
- if (conn->pipe[1][0] != -1) {
- close(conn->pipe[1][0]);
- close(conn->pipe[1][1]);
- conn->pipe[1][0] = conn->pipe[1][1] = -1;
+
+ if (side == 0 || conn->events & SPLICE_CONNECT) {
+ close(conn->s[side]);
+ conn->s[side] = -1;
}
- }
- if (conn->events & SPLICE_CONNECT) {
- close(conn->s[1]);
- conn->s[1] = -1;
+ conn->read[side] = conn->written[side] = 0;
}
- close(conn->s[0]);
- conn->s[0] = -1;
- conn->read[0] = conn->written[0] = conn->read[1] = conn->written[1] = 0;
With this, on SPLICE_CONNECT, we would close the [0] side, but not the
[1] side. SPLICE_CONNECT means we already have an open socket for [1],
though. I think it should be:
[loop on sides]
if (side == 1 || conn->events & SPLICE_CONNECT) {
close(conn->s[side]);
conn->s[1] = -1;
}
}
and then we still need to unconditionally close conn->s[0]. Perhaps we could
take both parts outside of the loop:
Uh.. I think you're misreading. In the updated code we have:
if (side == 0 || conn->events & SPLICE_CONNECT) {
close(conn->s[side]);
conn->s[side] = -1;
}
That's an OR, so we always close side 0, and we close side 1 iff we
have SPLICE_CONNECT, which matches what you're describing.