Re: [PATCH RFC net-next v5 07/14] virtio/vsock: add common datagram send path

[Arseniy Krasnov]

On 26.07.2023 20:08, Bobby Eshleman wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2023 at 11:16:05AM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 19.07.2023 03:50, Bobby Eshleman wrote:
>>> This commit implements the common function
>>> virtio_transport_dgram_enqueue for enqueueing datagrams. It does not add
>>> usage in either vhost or virtio yet.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bobby Eshleman <bobby.eshleman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 76 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>  1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>>> index ffcbdd77feaa..3bfaff758433 100644
>>> --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>>> +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
>>> @@ -819,7 +819,81 @@ virtio_transport_dgram_enqueue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
>>>  			       struct msghdr *msg,
>>>  			       size_t dgram_len)
>>>  {
>>> -	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>> +	/* Here we are only using the info struct to retain style uniformity
>>> +	 * and to ease future refactoring and merging.
>>> +	 */
>>> +	struct virtio_vsock_pkt_info info_stack = {
>>> +		.op = VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_RW,
>>> +		.msg = msg,
>>> +		.vsk = vsk,
>>> +		.type = VIRTIO_VSOCK_TYPE_DGRAM,
>>> +	};
>>> +	const struct virtio_transport *t_ops;
>>> +	struct virtio_vsock_pkt_info *info;
>>> +	struct sock *sk = sk_vsock(vsk);
>>> +	struct virtio_vsock_hdr *hdr;
>>> +	u32 src_cid, src_port;
>>> +	struct sk_buff *skb;
>>> +	void *payload;
>>> +	int noblock;
>>> +	int err;
>>> +
>>> +	info = &info_stack;
>>
>> I think 'info' assignment could be moved below, to the place where it is used
>> first time.
>>
>>> +
>>> +	if (dgram_len > VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE)
>>> +		return -EMSGSIZE;
>>> +
>>> +	t_ops = virtio_transport_get_ops(vsk);
>>> +	if (unlikely(!t_ops))
>>> +		return -EFAULT;
>>> +
>>> +	/* Unlike some of our other sending functions, this function is not
>>> +	 * intended for use without a msghdr.
>>> +	 */
>>> +	if (WARN_ONCE(!msg, "vsock dgram bug: no msghdr found for dgram enqueue\n"))
>>> +		return -EFAULT;
>>
>> Sorry, but is that possible? I thought 'msg' is always provided by general socket layer (e.g. before
>> af_vsock.c code) and can't be NULL for DGRAM. Please correct me if i'm wrong.
>>
>> Also I see, that in af_vsock.c , 'vsock_dgram_sendmsg()' dereferences 'msg' for checking MSG_OOB without any
>> checks (before calling transport callback - this function in case of virtio). So I think if we want to keep
>> this type of check - such check must be placed in af_vsock.c or somewhere before first dereference of this pointer.
>>
> 
> There is some talk about dgram sockets adding additional messages types
> in the future that help with congestion control. Those messages won't
> come from the socket layer, so msghdr will be null. Since there is no
> other function for sending datagrams, it seemed likely that this
> function would be reworked for that purpose. I felt that adding this
> check was a direct way to make it explicit that this function is
> currently designed only for the socket-layer caller.
> 
> Perhaps a comment would suffice?

I see, thanks, it is for future usage. Sorry for dumb question: but if msg is NULL, how
we will decide what to do in this call? Interface of this callback will be updated or
some fields of 'vsock_sock' will contain type of such messages ?

Thanks, Arseniy

> 
>>> +
>>> +	noblock = msg->msg_flags & MSG_DONTWAIT;
>>> +
>>> +	/* Use sock_alloc_send_skb to throttle by sk_sndbuf. This helps avoid
>>> +	 * triggering the OOM.
>>> +	 */
>>> +	skb = sock_alloc_send_skb(sk, dgram_len + VIRTIO_VSOCK_SKB_HEADROOM,
>>> +				  noblock, &err);
>>> +	if (!skb)
>>> +		return err;
>>> +
>>> +	skb_reserve(skb, VIRTIO_VSOCK_SKB_HEADROOM);
>>> +
>>> +	src_cid = t_ops->transport.get_local_cid();
>>> +	src_port = vsk->local_addr.svm_port;
>>> +
>>> +	hdr = virtio_vsock_hdr(skb);
>>> +	hdr->type	= cpu_to_le16(info->type);
>>> +	hdr->op		= cpu_to_le16(info->op);
>>> +	hdr->src_cid	= cpu_to_le64(src_cid);
>>> +	hdr->dst_cid	= cpu_to_le64(remote_addr->svm_cid);
>>> +	hdr->src_port	= cpu_to_le32(src_port);
>>> +	hdr->dst_port	= cpu_to_le32(remote_addr->svm_port);
>>> +	hdr->flags	= cpu_to_le32(info->flags);
>>> +	hdr->len	= cpu_to_le32(dgram_len);
>>> +
>>> +	skb_set_owner_w(skb, sk);
>>> +
>>> +	payload = skb_put(skb, dgram_len);
>>> +	err = memcpy_from_msg(payload, msg, dgram_len);
>>> +	if (err)
>>> +		return err;
>>
>> Do we need free allocated skb here ?
>>
> 
> Yep, thanks.
> 
>>> +
>>> +	trace_virtio_transport_alloc_pkt(src_cid, src_port,
>>> +					 remote_addr->svm_cid,
>>> +					 remote_addr->svm_port,
>>> +					 dgram_len,
>>> +					 info->type,
>>> +					 info->op,
>>> +					 0);
>>> +
>>> +	return t_ops->send_pkt(skb);
>>>  }
>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(virtio_transport_dgram_enqueue);
>>>  
>>>
>>
>> Thanks, Arseniy
> 
> Thanks for the review!
> 
> Best,
> Bobby