search for: vsock_remove_sock

...gt; > The race condition as follows: > Task1 Task2 > ===== ===== > __sock_release virtio_transport_recv_pkt > __vsock_release vsock_find_bound_socket (found) > lock_sock_nested > vsock_remove_sock > sock_orphan > sk_set_socket(sk, NULL) > ... > release_sock > lock_sock > virtio_transport_recv_connecting > sk->sk_socket->state (panic) > >...

...able(vsk); - spin_unlock_bh(&vsock_table_lock); - - return ret; -} - -static bool vsock_in_connected_table(struct vsock_sock *vsk) -{ - bool ret; - - spin_lock_bh(&vsock_table_lock); - ret = __vsock_in_connected_table(vsk); - spin_unlock_bh(&vsock_table_lock); - - return ret; -} - void vsock_remove_sock(struct vsock_sock *vsk) { - if (vsock_in_bound_table(vsk)) - vsock_remove_bound(vsk); - - if (vsock_in_connected_table(vsk)) - vsock_remove_connected(vsk); + vsock_remove_bound(vsk); + vsock_remove_connected(vsk); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vsock_remove_sock); @@ -485,8 +462,7 @@ static void vsock_...

...able(vsk); - spin_unlock_bh(&vsock_table_lock); - - return ret; -} - -static bool vsock_in_connected_table(struct vsock_sock *vsk) -{ - bool ret; - - spin_lock_bh(&vsock_table_lock); - ret = __vsock_in_connected_table(vsk); - spin_unlock_bh(&vsock_table_lock); - - return ret; -} - void vsock_remove_sock(struct vsock_sock *vsk) { - if (vsock_in_bound_table(vsk)) - vsock_remove_bound(vsk); - - if (vsock_in_connected_table(vsk)) - vsock_remove_connected(vsk); + vsock_remove_bound(vsk); + vsock_remove_connected(vsk); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(vsock_remove_sock); @@ -485,8 +462,7 @@ static void vsock_...

...dition is as follows: > Task1 Task2 > ===== ===== > __sock_release virtio_transport_recv_pkt > __vsock_release vsock_find_bound_socket (found sk) > lock_sock_nested > vsock_remove_sock > sock_orphan > sk_set_socket(sk, NULL) > sk->sk_shutdown = SHUTDOWN_MASK > ... > release_sock > lock_sock > virtio_transport_recv_connecting >...

...gt; > The race condition as follows: > Task1 Task2 > ===== ===== > __sock_release virtio_transport_recv_pkt > __vsock_release vsock_find_bound_socket (found) > lock_sock_nested > vsock_remove_sock > sock_orphan > sk_set_socket(sk, NULL) Here we can add: sk->sk_shutdown = SHUTDOWN_MASK; > ... > release_sock > lock_sock > virtio_transport_recv_connecting >...

This series is based on v4.7. This RFC is the implementation for the new VIRTIO Socket device. It is developed in parallel with the VIRTIO device specification and proves the design. Once the specification has been accepted I will send a non-RFC version of this patch series. v6: * Add VHOST_VSOCK_SET_RUNNING ioctl to start/stop vhost cleanly * Add graceful shutdown to avoid port reuse while

This series is based on v4.7. This RFC is the implementation for the new VIRTIO Socket device. It is developed in parallel with the VIRTIO device specification and proves the design. Once the specification has been accepted I will send a non-RFC version of this patch series. v6: * Add VHOST_VSOCK_SET_RUNNING ioctl to start/stop vhost cleanly * Add graceful shutdown to avoid port reuse while

...ransport *t); /* The transport may downcast this to access transport-specific functions */ const struct vsock_transport *vsock_core_get_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk); @@ -190,6 +194,7 @@ struct sock *vsock_find_connected_socket(struct sockaddr_vm *src, struct sockaddr_vm *dst); void vsock_remove_sock(struct vsock_sock *vsk); void vsock_for_each_connected_socket(void (*fn)(struct sock *sk)); +int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk); /**** TAP ****/ diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c index d89381166028..dddd85d9a147 100644 ---...

...ransport *t); /* The transport may downcast this to access transport-specific functions */ const struct vsock_transport *vsock_core_get_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk); @@ -192,6 +194,7 @@ struct sock *vsock_find_connected_socket(struct sockaddr_vm *src, struct sockaddr_vm *dst); void vsock_remove_sock(struct vsock_sock *vsk); void vsock_for_each_connected_socket(void (*fn)(struct sock *sk)); +int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk); /**** TAP ****/ diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c index 95e6db21e7e1..c52203fe52c4 100644 ---...

...access transport-specific functions */ > const struct vsock_transport *vsock_core_get_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk); > @@ -190,6 +194,7 @@ struct sock *vsock_find_connected_socket(struct sockaddr_vm *src, > struct sockaddr_vm *dst); > void vsock_remove_sock(struct vsock_sock *vsk); > void vsock_for_each_connected_socket(void (*fn)(struct sock *sk)); > +int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk); > > /**** TAP ****/ > > diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c > index d89381...

...access transport-specific functions */ > const struct vsock_transport *vsock_core_get_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk); > @@ -190,6 +194,7 @@ struct sock *vsock_find_connected_socket(struct sockaddr_vm *src, > struct sockaddr_vm *dst); > void vsock_remove_sock(struct vsock_sock *vsk); > void vsock_for_each_connected_socket(void (*fn)(struct sock *sk)); > +int vsock_assign_transport(struct vsock_sock *vsk, struct vsock_sock *psk); > > /**** TAP ****/ > > diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c > index d89381...

Hi, now that we have multi-transport upstream, I started to take a look to support network namespace (netns) in vsock. As we partially discussed in the multi-transport proposal [1], it could be nice to support network namespace in vsock to reach the following goals: - isolate host applications from guest applications using the same ports with CID_ANY - assign the same CID of VMs running in

Hi, now that we have multi-transport upstream, I started to take a look to support network namespace (netns) in vsock. As we partially discussed in the multi-transport proposal [1], it could be nice to support network namespace in vsock to reach the following goals: - isolate host applications from guest applications using the same ports with CID_ANY - assign the same CID of VMs running in

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

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