From patchwork Fri Mar 10 11:46:23 2017 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Ben Hutchings X-Patchwork-Id: 737417 X-Patchwork-Delegate: davem@davemloft.net Return-Path: X-Original-To: patchwork-incoming@ozlabs.org Delivered-To: patchwork-incoming@ozlabs.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3vfnyH0W1mz9ryQ for ; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 00:23:19 +1100 (AEDT) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934797AbdCJNWd (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Mar 2017 08:22:33 -0500 Received: from shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk ([88.96.1.126]:43743 "EHLO shadbolt.e.decadent.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934701AbdCJLwh (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Mar 2017 06:52:37 -0500 Received: from 82-70-136-246.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk ([82.70.136.246] helo=deadeye) by shadbolt.decadent.org.uk with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cmJ5w-0008Vf-3G; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 11:52:28 +0000 Received: from ben by deadeye with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1cmJ5t-0003rW-EW; Fri, 10 Mar 2017 11:52:25 +0000 Content-Disposition: inline MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Ben Hutchings To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org CC: akpm@linux-foundation.org, "Adit Ranadive" , "Dmitry Torokhov" , "Stefan Hajnoczi" , "Jorgen Hansen" , "David S. Miller" , "Claudio Imbrenda" , "Ian Campbell" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "Andy King" Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2017 11:46:23 +0000 Message-ID: X-Mailer: LinuxStableQueue (scripts by bwh) Subject: [PATCH 3.16 316/370] VSOCK: do not disconnect socket when peer has shutdown SEND only In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 82.70.136.246 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: ben@decadent.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on shadbolt.decadent.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org 3.16.42-rc1 review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Ian Campbell [ Upstream commit dedc58e067d8c379a15a8a183c5db318201295bb ] The peer may be expecting a reply having sent a request and then done a shutdown(SHUT_WR), so tearing down the whole socket at this point seems wrong and breaks for me with a client which does a SHUT_WR. Looking at other socket family's stream_recvmsg callbacks doing a shutdown here does not seem to be the norm and removing it does not seem to have had any adverse effects that I can see. I'm using Stefan's RFC virtio transport patches, I'm unsure of the impact on the vmci transport. Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell Cc: "David S. Miller" Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi Cc: Claudio Imbrenda Cc: Andy King Cc: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Jorgen Hansen Cc: Adit Ranadive Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: David S. Miller Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings --- net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 21 +-------------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 20 deletions(-) --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -1796,27 +1796,8 @@ vsock_stream_recvmsg(struct kiocb *kiocb else if (sk->sk_shutdown & RCV_SHUTDOWN) err = 0; - if (copied > 0) { - /* We only do these additional bookkeeping/notification steps - * if we actually copied something out of the queue pair - * instead of just peeking ahead. - */ - - if (!(flags & MSG_PEEK)) { - /* If the other side has shutdown for sending and there - * is nothing more to read, then modify the socket - * state. - */ - if (vsk->peer_shutdown & SEND_SHUTDOWN) { - if (vsock_stream_has_data(vsk) <= 0) { - sk->sk_state = SS_UNCONNECTED; - sock_set_flag(sk, SOCK_DONE); - sk->sk_state_change(sk); - } - } - } + if (copied > 0) err = copied; - } out_wait: finish_wait(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);