similar to: [RFC PATCH v2 2/2] test/vsock: shutdowned socket test

On Sun, Mar 19, 2023 at 09:53:54PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >This adds test which checks case when data of newly received skbuff is >appended to the last skbuff in the socket's queue. > >This test is actual only for virtio transport. > >Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <AVKrasnov at sberdevices.ru> >--- > tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 81

From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> The vsock_test.c program runs a test suite of AF_VSOCK test cases. Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> --- v2: * Drop unnecessary includes [Stefan] * Aligned with the current SPDX [Stefano] * Set MULTICONN_NFDS to 100 [Stefano] * Change (i % 1) in (i

Hi Stefan, I'm thinking about dividing this test into single applications, one for each test, do you think it makes sense? Or is it just a useless complication? Thanks, Stefano On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 5:27 PM Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> wrote: > > From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> > > The vsock_test.c program runs a test suite of AF_VSOCK

Hi Stefan, I'm thinking about dividing this test into single applications, one for each test, do you think it makes sense? Or is it just a useless complication? Thanks, Stefano On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 5:27 PM Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> wrote: > > From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> > > The vsock_test.c program runs a test suite of AF_VSOCK

When VMCI transport is used, if the guest closes a connection, all data is gone and EOF is returned, so we should skip the read of data written by the peer before closing the connection. Reported-by: Jorgen Hansen <jhansen at vmware.com> Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com> --- tools/testing/vsock/vsock_test.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 24

Hello! On 08/01/2019 06:25 PM, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > When VMCI transport is used, if the guest closes a connection, > all data is gone and EOF is returned, so we should skip the read > of data written by the peer before closing the connection. > > Reported-by: Jorgen Hansen <jhansen at vmware.com> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare at redhat.com>

The vsock_diag.ko module already has a test suite but the core AF_VSOCK functionality has no tests. This patch series adds several test cases that exercise AF_VSOCK SOCK_STREAM socket semantics (send/recv, connect/accept, half-closed connections, simultaneous connections). Stefan: Do you think we should have a single application or is better to split it in single tests (e.g.

The vsock_diag.ko module already has a test suite but the core AF_VSOCK functionality has no tests. This patch series adds several test cases that exercise AF_VSOCK SOCK_STREAM socket semantics (send/recv, connect/accept, half-closed connections, simultaneous connections). The v1 of this series was originally sent by Stefan. v3: - Patch 6: * check the byte received in the recv_byte() * use

On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 08:58:59PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >POSIX requires to send SIGPIPE on write to SOCK_STREAM socket which was >shutdowned with SHUT_WR flag or its peer was shutdowned with SHUT_RD >flag. Also we must not send SIGPIPE if MSG_NOSIGNAL flag is set. > >Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov at salutedevices.com> >--- > net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c

Hi Arseniy, On Sat, Aug 26, 2023 at 08:58:58PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >Hello, > >this small patchset adds POSIX compliant behaviour on writes to the >socket which was shutdowned with 'shutdown()' (both sides - local with >SHUT_WR flag, peer - with SHUT_RD flag). According POSIX we must send >SIGPIPE in such cases (but SIGPIPE is not send when MSG_NOSIGNAL is set).

On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 03:46:47PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >Hi Stefano, > >On 02.08.2023 10:46, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 05:17:26PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >>> POSIX requires to send SIGPIPE on write to SOCK_STREAM socket which was >>> shutdowned with SHUT_WR flag or its peer was shutdowned with SHUT_RD >>> flag.

On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 05:34:20PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: > > >On 04.08.2023 17:28, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 03:46:47PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >>> Hi Stefano, >>> >>> On 02.08.2023 10:46, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >>>> On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 05:17:26PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >>>>>

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 10:46:05PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: > > >On 04.08.2023 17:28, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 03:46:47PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >>> Hi Stefano, >>> >>> On 02.08.2023 10:46, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >>>> On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 05:17:26PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >>>>>

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 10:40:17PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: > > >On 04.08.2023 18:02, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 05:34:20PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 04.08.2023 17:28, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >>>> On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 03:46:47PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >>>>> Hi Stefano,