Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/2] vsock/test: SO_RCVLOWAT + deferred credit update test

[Arseniy Krasnov]

On 17.11.2023 11:30, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 10:12:38AM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 15.11.2023 14:11, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 08, 2023 at 10:20:04AM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:
>>>> This adds test which checks, that updating SO_RCVLOWAT value also sends
>>>
>>> You can avoid "This adds", and write just "Add test ...".
>>>
>>> See https://docs.kernel.org/process/submitting-patches.html#describe-your-changes
>>>
>>>     Describe your changes in imperative mood, e.g. "make xyzzy do frotz"
>>>     instead of "[This patch] makes xyzzy do frotz" or "[I] changed xyzzy
>>>     to do frotz", as if you are giving orders to the codebase to change
>>>     its behaviour.
>>>
>>> Also in the other patch.
>>>
>>>> credit update message. Otherwise mutual hungup may happen when receiver
>>>> didn't send credit update and then calls 'poll()' with non default
>>>> SO_RCVLOWAT value (e.g. waiting enough bytes to read), while sender
>>>> waits for free space at receiver's side.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 131 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 131 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>>>> index c1f7bc9abd22..c71b3875fd16 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c
>>>> @@ -1180,6 +1180,132 @@ static void test_stream_shutrd_server(const struct test_opts *opts)
>>>>     close(fd);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> +#define RCVLOWAT_CREDIT_UPD_BUF_SIZE    (1024 * 128)
>>>> +#define VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE    (1024 * 64)
>>>
>>> What about adding a comment like the one in the cover letter about
>>> dependency with kernel values?
>>>
>>> Please add it also in the commit description.
>>>
>>> I'm thinking if we should move all the defines that depends on the
>>> kernel in some special header.
>>
>> IIUC it will be new header file in tools/testing/vsock, which includes such defines. At
>> this moment in will contain only VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE. Idea is that such defines
> 
> So this only works on the virtio transport though, not the other
> transports, right? (but maybe the others don't have this problem, so
> it's fine).

Yes, this case is only actual in virtio as this logic exists in virtio
only (the same situation as for skb merging sometimes ago).

> 
>> are not supposed to use by user (so do not move it to uapi headers), but needed by tests
>> to check kernel behaviour. Please correct me if i'm wrong.
> 
> Right!
> Maybe if it's just one, we can leave it there for now, but with a
> comment on top explaining where it comes.

Ok, got it, I'll add comment

Thanks, Arseniy

> 
> Thanks,
> Stefano
>