On Thu, Jan 08, 2026 at 08:13:03AM +0100, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> On 1/8/26 00:48, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 07, 2026 at 09:08:09AM +0100, Laurent Vivier wrote:
> > > During vhost-user device initialization, UDP datagrams may arrive on
> > > listening sockets before the guest has enabled the RX virtqueue.
> > > 
> > > When this happens, udp_vu_sock_recv() returns 0 without consuming
> > > the datagram from the socket. The caller, udp_sock_fwd(), uses a
> > > while loop with udp_peek_addr() to process pending datagrams. Since
> > > the datagram remains in the socket buffer, udp_peek_addr() keeps
> > > returning data available, causing a busy loop with 100% CPU usage.
> > > 
> > > To avoid that, we need to discard the data when the virtqueue is not
> > > ready. udp_buf_sock_to_tap() actually does the same as it reads data
> > > with udp_sock_recv() and if fd_tap is not initialized tap_send_frames()
> > > drops them.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 28997fcb29b5 ("vhost-user: add vhost-user")
> > > Link: https://bugs.passt.top/show_bug.cgi?id=185
> > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> > 
> > Although one possible nit noted..
> > 
> > > ---
> > > 
> > > Notes:
> > >      v2:
> > >        - move recvmsg() from udp_vu_sock_to_tap() to udp_vu_sock_recv()
> > > 
> > >   udp_vu.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> > >   1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/udp_vu.c b/udp_vu.c
> > > index c30dcf97698f..3774d538a2d0 100644
> > > --- a/udp_vu.c
> > > +++ b/udp_vu.c
> > > @@ -65,7 +65,8 @@ static size_t udp_vu_hdrlen(bool v6)
> > >    * @v6:		Set for IPv6 connections
> > >    * @dlen:	Size of received data (output)
> > >    *
> > > - * Return: number of iov entries used to store the datagram
> > > + * Return: number of iov entries used to store the datagram, 0 if the datagram
> > > + *         was discarded because the virtqueue is not ready, -1 on error
> > >    */
> > >   static int udp_vu_sock_recv(const struct ctx *c, struct vu_virtq *vq, int s,
> > >   			    bool v6, ssize_t *dlen)
> > > @@ -77,6 +78,15 @@ static int udp_vu_sock_recv(const struct ctx *c, struct vu_virtq *vq, int s,
> > >   	ASSERT(!c->no_udp);
> > > +	if (!vu_queue_enabled(vq) || !vu_queue_started(vq)) {
> > > +		debug("Got UDP packet, but RX virtqueue not usable yet");
> > > +
> > > +		if (recvmsg(s, &msg, MSG_DONTWAIT) < 0)
> > 
> > You use MSG_DONTWAIT here, but you don't on the normal path.  I guess
> > it shouldn't make a difference, since we've come from epoll so we know
> > something is waiting for us.  But I think we want to make the paths
> > look as identical as we can from the point of view of the socket side,
> > and this makes it a bit less obvious.
> 
> This is actually consistent with the existing discard pattern in
> udp_sock_fwd(). When udp_sock_fwd() needs to discard a datagram, it does
> exactly the same thing:
> 
>   if (discard) {
>   	struct msghdr msg = { 0 };
> 
>   	if (recvmsg(s, &msg, MSG_DONTWAIT) < 0)
>   		debug_perror("Failed to discard datagram");
>   }

Ah, true.  I'd say it's a nit there, too.

> udp_sock_fwd() loops on  udp_peek_addr(), calls udp_vu_sock_to_tap() (and then
> udp_vu_sock_recv()). If something has to be discarded it calls
> recvmsg(s, &msg, MSG_DONTWAIT).

Ah, that's a point.  The fact we've just MSG_PEEKed means that we can
be certain there is something in the queue, making it more obvious
that MSG_DONTWAIT won't have any effect.

Anyway,

Reviewed-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>

-- 
David Gibson (he or they)	| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you, not the other way
				| around.
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson