Re: [PATCH net] tls: skip empty data records in tls_sw_splice_read()

[Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net>]

2026-09-30, 06:45:23 -0700, Chuck Lever wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 30, 2026, at 2:47 AM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> > 2026-09-30, 17:24:18 +0800, Qingfang Deng wrote:
> >> On 2026/9/30 17:13, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
> >> > 2026-09-30, 13:26:36 +0800, Qingfang Deng wrote:
> >> > > tls_sw_splice_read() returns 0 after receiving an empty application
> >> > > record. This looks like EOF for splice(), even though the connection
> >> > > remains open and more data may be available.
> >> > > 
> >> > > Consume empty application records and retry the receive path instead,
> >> > > following the approach used in tls_sw_read_sock() since commit
> >> > > 3be28e2c9cd0 ("net/tls: Consume empty data records in tls_sw_read_sock()").
> >> > This is similar to what Chuck proposed in July:
> >> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260726-tls-follow-on-v1-2-99bf4cc1c729@kernel.org
> >> > 
> >> > but Chuck's patch had some extra bits (handling of the "released" flag
> >> > and of signal_pending).
> >> > 
> >> > His series also had a selftest which should be included too
> >> > https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260726-tls-follow-on-v1-6-99bf4cc1c729@kernel.org/
> >> 
> >> Thanks for the information. I prefer his series.
> >
> > Let's see if he has the time/interest to continue work on this (since
> > he didn't send a v2, I'm guessing not).
> >
> > Chuck, do you want to pick up that TLS fixes series again, or would
> > you rather let Qingfang finish off the "splice vs empty record"
> > patch+selftest based on what you had sent?
> 
> History: I stopped working on that since Jakub seemed to think the
> fixes were not worth the trouble, and my objective is to get kTLS
> and its kernel consumers in shape to support KeyUpdate.

I /think/ he meant that some patches in that series were ready to go
in and worthy of being merged quickly, while others were less urgent
and less ready, and could be finished later on (but not necessarily
that the issues shouldn't be fixed at all).

But I guess we could just ask him.

> If you think cleaning up and reposting an old series would be
> received well, I can take it up again. (And forgive me, but can
> you send along a lore URL so I'm sure I'm working on the correct
> one?)

The link was in my previous email:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260726-tls-follow-on-v1-2-99bf4cc1c729@kernel.org

-- 
Sabrina