Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1612652 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-03-30 09:30 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-03-31 06:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
[PATCH V2 net-next 5/7] tun: support receiving skb through msg_control Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> - 2017-03-30 09:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 5/7] tun: support receiving skb through msg_control "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> - 2017-03-30 17:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 5/7] tun: support receiving skb through msg_control Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> - 2017-03-31 06:20 +0200
| From | Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-30 09:30 +0200 |
| Subject | [PATCH V2 net-next 5/7] tun: support receiving skb through msg_control |
| Message-ID | <tqCGR-2MS-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
This patch makes tun_recvmsg() can receive from skb from its caller
through msg_control. Vhost_net will be the first user.
Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
---
drivers/net/tun.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
index 70dd9ec..a82bced 100644
--- a/drivers/net/tun.c
+++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
@@ -1498,9 +1498,8 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_ring_recv(struct tun_file *tfile, int noblock,
static ssize_t tun_do_read(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile,
struct iov_iter *to,
- int noblock)
+ int noblock, struct sk_buff *skb)
{
- struct sk_buff *skb;
ssize_t ret;
int err;
@@ -1509,10 +1508,12 @@ static ssize_t tun_do_read(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile,
if (!iov_iter_count(to))
return 0;
- /* Read frames from ring */
- skb = tun_ring_recv(tfile, noblock, &err);
- if (!skb)
- return err;
+ if (!skb) {
+ /* Read frames from ring */
+ skb = tun_ring_recv(tfile, noblock, &err);
+ if (!skb)
+ return err;
+ }
ret = tun_put_user(tun, tfile, skb, to);
if (unlikely(ret < 0))
@@ -1532,7 +1533,7 @@ static ssize_t tun_chr_read_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *to)
if (!tun)
return -EBADFD;
- ret = tun_do_read(tun, tfile, to, file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK);
+ ret = tun_do_read(tun, tfile, to, file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK, NULL);
ret = min_t(ssize_t, ret, len);
if (ret > 0)
iocb->ki_pos = ret;
@@ -1634,7 +1635,8 @@ static int tun_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *m, size_t total_len,
SOL_PACKET, TUN_TX_TIMESTAMP);
goto out;
}
- ret = tun_do_read(tun, tfile, &m->msg_iter, flags & MSG_DONTWAIT);
+ ret = tun_do_read(tun, tfile, &m->msg_iter, flags & MSG_DONTWAIT,
+ m->msg_control);
if (ret > (ssize_t)total_len) {
m->msg_flags |= MSG_TRUNC;
ret = flags & MSG_TRUNC ? ret : total_len;
--
2.7.4
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-30 17:10 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 5/7] tun: support receiving skb through msg_control |
| Message-ID | <tqJS1-8b4-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1612652 |
On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 03:22:28PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> This patch makes tun_recvmsg() can receive from skb from its caller
> through msg_control. Vhost_net will be the first user.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Do we need to bother with tun? I didn't realize one
can even use that with vhost. What would be the point of
all the virtio header stuff dealing with checksums etc?
Even if you see a use-case is it worth optimizing?
> ---
> drivers/net/tun.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
> index 70dd9ec..a82bced 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
> @@ -1498,9 +1498,8 @@ static struct sk_buff *tun_ring_recv(struct tun_file *tfile, int noblock,
>
> static ssize_t tun_do_read(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile,
> struct iov_iter *to,
> - int noblock)
> + int noblock, struct sk_buff *skb)
> {
> - struct sk_buff *skb;
> ssize_t ret;
> int err;
>
> @@ -1509,10 +1508,12 @@ static ssize_t tun_do_read(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile,
> if (!iov_iter_count(to))
> return 0;
>
> - /* Read frames from ring */
> - skb = tun_ring_recv(tfile, noblock, &err);
> - if (!skb)
> - return err;
> + if (!skb) {
> + /* Read frames from ring */
> + skb = tun_ring_recv(tfile, noblock, &err);
> + if (!skb)
> + return err;
> + }
>
> ret = tun_put_user(tun, tfile, skb, to);
> if (unlikely(ret < 0))
> @@ -1532,7 +1533,7 @@ static ssize_t tun_chr_read_iter(struct kiocb *iocb, struct iov_iter *to)
>
> if (!tun)
> return -EBADFD;
> - ret = tun_do_read(tun, tfile, to, file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK);
> + ret = tun_do_read(tun, tfile, to, file->f_flags & O_NONBLOCK, NULL);
> ret = min_t(ssize_t, ret, len);
> if (ret > 0)
> iocb->ki_pos = ret;
> @@ -1634,7 +1635,8 @@ static int tun_recvmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *m, size_t total_len,
> SOL_PACKET, TUN_TX_TIMESTAMP);
> goto out;
> }
> - ret = tun_do_read(tun, tfile, &m->msg_iter, flags & MSG_DONTWAIT);
> + ret = tun_do_read(tun, tfile, &m->msg_iter, flags & MSG_DONTWAIT,
> + m->msg_control);
> if (ret > (ssize_t)total_len) {
> m->msg_flags |= MSG_TRUNC;
> ret = flags & MSG_TRUNC ? ret : total_len;
> --
> 2.7.4
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-03-31 06:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH V2 net-next 5/7] tun: support receiving skb through msg_control |
| Message-ID | <tqWcy-7Zp-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1613145 |
On 2017年03月30日 23:06, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 03:22:28PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> This patch makes tun_recvmsg() can receive from skb from its caller >> through msg_control. Vhost_net will be the first user. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang<jasowang@redhat.com> > Do we need to bother with tun? I didn't realize one > can even use that with vhost. What would be the point of > all the virtio header stuff dealing with checksums etc? > > Even if you see a use-case is it worth optimizing? > > It's for tap in fact. I use "tun" just because we have already had a tap.c which is used by macvtap. Thanks
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web