4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------ From: Ian Campbell <[email protected]> [ Upstream commit dedc58e067d8c379a15a8a183c5db318201295bb ] The peer may be expecting a reply having sent a request and then done a shutdown(SHUT_WR), so tearing down the whole socket at this point seems wrong and breaks for me with a client which does a SHUT_WR. Looking at other socket family's stream_recvmsg callbacks doing a shutdown here does not seem to be the norm and removing it does not seem to have had any adverse effects that I can see. I'm using Stefan's RFC virtio transport patches, I'm unsure of the impact on the vmci transport. Signed-off-by: Ian Campbell <[email protected]> Cc: "David S. Miller" <[email protected]> Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <[email protected]> Cc: Claudio Imbrenda <[email protected]> Cc: Andy King <[email protected]> Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <[email protected]> Cc: Jorgen Hansen <[email protected]> Cc: Adit Ranadive <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> --- net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c | 21 +-------------------- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 20 deletions(-) --- a/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/af_vsock.c @@ -1794,27 +1794,8 @@ vsock_stream_recvmsg(struct socket *sock else if (sk->sk_shutdown & RCV_SHUTDOWN) err = 0; - if (copied > 0) { - /* We only do these additional bookkeeping/notification steps - * if we actually copied something out of the queue pair - * instead of just peeking ahead. - */ - - if (!(flags & MSG_PEEK)) { - /* If the other side has shutdown for sending and there - * is nothing more to read, then modify the socket - * state. - */ - if (vsk->peer_shutdown & SEND_SHUTDOWN) { - if (vsock_stream_has_data(vsk) <= 0) { - sk->sk_state = SS_UNCONNECTED; - sock_set_flag(sk, SOCK_DONE); - sk->sk_state_change(sk); - } - } - } + if (copied > 0) err = copied; - } out_wait: finish_wait(sk_sleep(sk), &wait);
