search for: vsock_dgram_op

...gt; --- net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c index 8a398b3..c73b03a 100644 --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -1101,10 +1101,19 @@ static const struct proto_ops vsock_dgram_ops = { .sendpage = sock_no_sendpage, }; +static int vsock_transport_cancel_pkt(struct vsock_sock *vsk) +{ + if (!transport->cancel_pkt) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + + return transport->cancel_pkt(vsk); +} + static void vsock_connect_timeout(struct work_struct *work) { struct sock *sk; st...

...gt; --- net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c index 8a398b3..c73b03a 100644 --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -1101,10 +1101,19 @@ static const struct proto_ops vsock_dgram_ops = { .sendpage = sock_no_sendpage, }; +static int vsock_transport_cancel_pkt(struct vsock_sock *vsk) +{ + if (!transport->cancel_pkt) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + + return transport->cancel_pkt(vsk); +} + static void vsock_connect_timeout(struct work_struct *work) { struct sock *sk; st...

...t *sock, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len, int flags) { - return transport->dgram_dequeue(vsock_sk(sock->sk), msg, len, flags); + struct vsock_sock *vsk = vsock_sk(sock->sk); + + return vsk->transport->dgram_dequeue(vsk, msg, len, flags); } static const struct proto_ops vsock_dgram_ops = { @@ -1071,6 +1079,8 @@ static const struct proto_ops vsock_dgram_ops = { static int vsock_transport_cancel_pkt(struct vsock_sock *vsk) { + const struct vsock_transport *transport = vsk->transport; + if (!transport->cancel_pkt) return -EOPNOTSUPP; @@ -1107,6 +1117,7 @@ static in...

...t *sock, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len, int flags) { - return transport->dgram_dequeue(vsock_sk(sock->sk), msg, len, flags); + struct vsock_sock *vsk = vsock_sk(sock->sk); + + return vsk->transport->dgram_dequeue(vsk, msg, len, flags); } static const struct proto_ops vsock_dgram_ops = { @@ -1079,6 +1087,8 @@ static const struct proto_ops vsock_dgram_ops = { static int vsock_transport_cancel_pkt(struct vsock_sock *vsk) { + const struct vsock_transport *transport = vsk->transport; + if (!transport->cancel_pkt) return -EOPNOTSUPP; @@ -1115,6 +1125,7 @@ static in...

To allow canceling all packets of a connection. Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peng Tao <bergwolf at gmail.com> --- drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/net/af_vsock.h | 3 +++ 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c index a504e2e0..fef8808 100644 ---

To allow canceling all packets of a connection. Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peng Tao <bergwolf at gmail.com> --- drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/net/af_vsock.h | 3 +++ 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c index a504e2e0..fef8808 100644 ---

To allow canceling all packets of a connection. Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peng Tao <bergwolf at gmail.com> --- drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/net/af_vsock.h | 3 +++ 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c index a504e2e0..db64d51 100644 ---

To allow canceling all packets of a connection. Reviewed-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Peng Tao <bergwolf at gmail.com> --- drivers/vhost/vsock.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ include/net/af_vsock.h | 3 +++ 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c index a504e2e0..db64d51 100644 ---

Hi David, These patchsets were sent before and reviewed by Stefan and Jorgen [https://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg142367.html]. If there is any blocker, please do tell and I'll see to it. Thanks! Currently, if a connect call fails on a signal or timeout (e.g., guest is still in the process of starting up), we'll just return to caller and leave the connect packet queued and they are sent

Hi David, These patchsets were sent before and reviewed by Stefan and Jorgen [https://www.spinics.net/lists/kvm/msg142367.html]. If there is any blocker, please do tell and I'll see to it. Thanks! Currently, if a connect call fails on a signal or timeout (e.g., guest is still in the process of starting up), we'll just return to caller and leave the connect packet queued and they are sent

Currently, if a connect call fails on a signal or timeout (e.g., guest is still in the process of starting up), we'll just return to caller and leave the connect packet queued and they are sent even though the connection is considered a failure, which can confuse applications with unwanted false connect attempt. The patchset enables vsock (both host and guest) to cancel queued packets when a

Currently, if a connect call fails on a signal or timeout (e.g., guest is still in the process of starting up), we'll just return to caller and leave the connect packet queued and they are sent even though the connection is considered a failure, which can confuse applications with unwanted false connect attempt. The patchset enables vsock (both host and guest) to cancel queued packets when a

This series adds the multi-transports support to vsock, following this proposal: https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html With the multi-transports support, we can use VSOCK with nested VMs (using also different hypervisors) loading both guest->host and host->guest transports at the same time. Before this series, vmci-transport supported this behavior but only using VMware

This series adds the multi-transports support to vsock, following this proposal: https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html With the multi-transports support, we can use VSOCK with nested VMs (using also different hypervisors) loading both guest->host and host->guest transports at the same time. Before this series, vmci-transport supported this behavior but only using VMware

Most of the patches are reviewed by Dexuan, Stefan, and Jorgen. The following patches need reviews: - [11/15] vsock: add multi-transports support - [12/15] vsock/vmci: register vmci_transport only when VMCI guest/host are active - [15/15] vhost/vsock: refuse CID assigned to the guest->host transport RFC: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/cover/1168442/ v1:

Hi all, this series adds the multi-transports support to vsock, following this proposal: https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html With the multi-transports support, we can use vsock with nested VMs (using also different hypervisors) loading both guest->host and host->guest transports at the same time. Before this series, vmci-transport supported this behavior but only using

Hi all, this series adds the multi-transports support to vsock, following this proposal: https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg575792.html With the multi-transports support, we can use vsock with nested VMs (using also different hypervisors) loading both guest->host and host->guest transports at the same time. Before this series, vmci-transport supported this behavior but only using

From: Andy King <acking at vmware.com> ** Introduce VM Sockets *** In an effort to improve the out-of-the-box experience with Linux kernels for VMware users, VMware is working on readying the VM Sockets (VSOCK, formerly VMCI Sockets) (vmw_vsock) kernel module for inclusion in the Linux kernel. The purpose of this post is to acquire feedback on the vmw_vsock kernel module. Unlike previous

From: Andy King <acking at vmware.com> ** Introduce VM Sockets *** In an effort to improve the out-of-the-box experience with Linux kernels for VMware users, VMware is working on readying the VM Sockets (VSOCK, formerly VMCI Sockets) (vmw_vsock) kernel module for inclusion in the Linux kernel. The purpose of this post is to acquire feedback on the vmw_vsock kernel module. Unlike previous