Re: [PATCH net v2 3/5] vsock: Enforce no-transport invariant for TCP_LISTEN sockets

[Stefano Garzarella <sgarzare@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 11:26:47PM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
> On 9/24/26 12:17, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 03:18:13PM +0200, Michal Luczaj wrote:
> >> ...
> >> I've addressed all your other comments for v2 and went through Ashiko's
> >> reports (side effects of lockless peer_shutdown write, imperfect
> >> no-transport TCP_LISTENER enforcement). I've decided to try the
> >> eager-unassign approach. I think/hope this way we sidestep the lockless
> >> writes and enforce the invariant without breaking the API, while fixing the
> >> bugs.
> >>
> >> This should probably be RFC, but I'm posting as v3[1] so netdev's LLM can
> >> have a go (too). Hope I'm not breaking any workflow. Let me know what you
> >> think.
> > 
> > I think you can add RFC also on a v3 patch, just to make it clear you 
> > are not sure it's ready to be merged.
> > 
> > That said, thanks for that :-) I'll take a look today or next week 
> > because I'm off tomorrow.
> > 
> > I'm just worried it's becoming too big for net. Anyway, I'll comment 
> > there.
> 
> Yeah, I get it. Would you rather have a single net.git patch[1] for the
> original report + keep all the rest for net-next, or do the whole series as
> is, but slowly at net-next?

I'd go with the first option. Let's try to get the fix into net first, 
and then move the rest to net-next at a reasonable pace. WDYT?

> 
> [1]: Basically
> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20260915-vsock-connect-reset-closing-v2-4-a1d9abb472f7@rbox.co/
> + your comments addressed + addressing one of Sashiko's comments, and
> ignoring the transport-reset-surprise one
> 

Yeah, that!

Thanks,
Stefano