On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 11:41:34 +1100
David Gibson
On Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 09:54:38PM +0200, Stefano Brivio wrote:
[Still partial review] [snip]
+ if (peek_offset_cap) + already_sent = 0; + + iov_vu[0].iov_base = tcp_buf_discard; + iov_vu[0].iov_len = already_sent;
I think I had a similar comment to a previous revision. Now, I haven't tested this (yet) on a kernel with support for SO_PEEK_OFF on TCP, but I think this should eventually follow the same logic as the (updated) tcp_buf_data_from_sock(): we should use tcp_buf_discard only if (!peek_offset_cap).
It's fine to always initialise VIRTQUEUE_MAX_SIZE iov_vu items, starting from 1, for simplicity. But I'm not sure if it's safe to pass a zero iov_len if (peek_offset_cap).
I'll test that (unless you already did) -- if it works, we can fix this up later as well.
I believe I tested it at some point, and I think we're already using it somewhere.
I tested it again just to be sure on a recent net.git kernel: sometimes the first test in passt_vu_in_ns/tcp, "TCP/IPv4: host to guest: big transfer" hangs on my setup, sometimes it's the "TCP/IPv4: ns to guest (using loopback address): big transfer" test instead. I can reproduce at least one of the two issues consistently (tests stopped 5 times out of 5). The socat client completes the transfer, the server is still waiting for something. I haven't taken captures yet or tried to re-send from the client. It all works (consistently) with an older kernel without support for SO_PEEK_OFF on TCP, but also on this kernel if I force peek_offset_cap to false in tcp_init(). -- Stefano