On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 00:26:52 +0000 Vadim Fedorenko wrote:
> > Damn, you may be seeing some problem I'm missing again ;) Running
> > __unparse can be opportunistic, if it doesn't parse anything that's
> > fine. I was thinking:
> >
> > diff --git a/net/tls/tls_sw.c b/net/tls/tls_sw.c
> > index 95ab5545a931..6478bd968506 100644
> > --- a/net/tls/tls_sw.c
> > +++ b/net/tls/tls_sw.c
> > @@ -1295,6 +1295,10 @@ static struct sk_buff *tls_wait_data(struct sock
> > *sk, struct sk_psock *psock,
> > return NULL;
> > }
> >
> > + __strp_unpause(&ctx->strp);
> > + if (ctx->recv_pkt)
> > + return ctx->recv_pkt;
> > +
> > if (sk->sk_shutdown & RCV_SHUTDOWN)
> > return NULL;
> >
> > Optionally it would be nice if unparse cancelled the work if it managed
> > to parse the record out.
> Oh, simple and fine solution. But is it better to unpause parser
> conditionally when
> there is something in the socket queue? Otherwise this call will be just
> wasting
> cycles. Maybe like this:
>
> diff --git a/net/tls/tls_sw.c b/net/tls/tls_sw.c
> index 2fe9e2c..97c5f6e 100644
> --- a/net/tls/tls_sw.c
> +++ b/net/tls/tls_sw.c
> @@ -1295,6 +1295,12 @@ static struct sk_buff *tls_wait_data(struct sock *sk,
> struct sk_psock *psock,
> return NULL;
> }
>
> + if (!skb_queue_empty(&sk->sk_receive_queue)) {
> + __strp_unpause(&ctx->strp);
> + if (ctx->recv_pkt)
> + return ctx->recv_pkt;
> + }
> +
> if (sk->sk_shutdown & RCV_SHUTDOWN)
> return NULL;
>
LGTM!
