Virtualization - Jul 2021 - [MASSMAIL KLMS] Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/7] virtio/vsock: introduce MSG_EOR flag for SEQPACKET

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 12:34:36PM +0300, Arseny Krasnov
wrote:
>
>On 27.07.2021 10:59, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
>> Caution: This is an external email. Be cautious while opening links or
attachments.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 07:31:33PM +0300, Arseny Krasnov wrote:
>>>       This patchset implements support of MSG_EOR bit for SEQPACKET
>>> AF_VSOCK sockets over virtio transport.
>>>       Idea is to distinguish concepts of 'messages' and
'records'.
>>> Message is result of sending calls: 'write()',
'send()', 'sendmsg()'
>>> etc. It has fixed maximum length, and it bounds are visible using
>>> return from receive calls: 'read()', 'recv()',
'recvmsg()' etc.
>>> Current implementation based on message definition above.
>>>       Record has unlimited length, it consists of multiple message,
>>> and bounds of record are visible via MSG_EOR flag returned from
>>> 'recvmsg()' call. Sender passes MSG_EOR to sending system
call and
>>> receiver will see MSG_EOR when corresponding message will be
processed.
>>>       To support MSG_EOR new bit was added along with existing
>>> 'VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOR':
'VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOM'(end-of-message) - now it
>>> works in the same way as 'VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOR'. But
'VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOR'
>>> is used to mark 'MSG_EOR' bit passed from userspace.
>> At this point it's probably better to rename the old flag, so we
stay
>> compatible.
>>
>> What happens if one of the two peers does not support MSG_EOR handling,
>> while the other does?
>>
>> I'll do a closer review in the next few days.
>Thank You, also i think MSG_EOR support must be described in spec
Yep, sure!

What do you think about the concerns above?

Stefano