From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
Cc: passt-dev@passt.top
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] tcp_splice: Exit forwarding earlier when stalled read side
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2026 17:08:00 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aiEkUFbQ_Z9tt7lJ@zatzit> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260604074456.06254db2@elisabeth>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4011 bytes --]
On Thu, Jun 04, 2026 at 07:44:56AM +0200, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jun 2026 15:26:36 +1000
> David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jun 04, 2026 at 06:41:47AM +0200, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> > > On Thu, 28 May 2026 15:02:13 +1000
> > > David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au> wrote:
> > >
> > > > At the end of our loop we have a conditional 'break' that exits if we're
> > > > at EOF on the read side and have nothing left in the pipe. This doesn't
> > > > depend on anything write-side, so we can move it earlier, avoiding an
> > > > unnecessary write side splice in this case.
> > > >
> > > > Furthermore, there's also nothing to be done write side if we've hit EAGAIN
> > > > on the read side and the pipe is empty, so exit early for that case as
> > > > well.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
> > > > ---
> > > > tcp_splice.c | 18 +++++++++++-------
> > > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/tcp_splice.c b/tcp_splice.c
> > > > index 565596d3..623ca926 100644
> > > > --- a/tcp_splice.c
> > > > +++ b/tcp_splice.c
> > > > @@ -497,9 +497,17 @@ static int tcp_splice_forward(struct ctx *c,
> > > >
> > > > flow_trace(conn, "%zi from read-side call", readlen);
> > > >
> > > > - if (!readlen) {
> > > > - conn_event(conn, FIN_RCVD(fromsidei));
> > > > - } else if (readlen > 0) {
> > > > + if (readlen <= 0) {
> > > > + if (!readlen) /* EOF */
> > > > + conn_event(conn, FIN_RCVD(fromsidei));
> > > > +
> > > > + /* We're either blocked or at EOF on the read side, and
> > > > + * there's nothing in the pipe so there's nothing to do
> > > > + * write side either.
> > > > + */
> > > > + if (!conn->pending[fromsidei])
> > > > + break;
> > > > + } else {
> > > > conn->pending[fromsidei] += readlen;
> > > >
> > > > if (readlen >= (long)c->tcp.pipe_size * 90 / 100)
> > > > @@ -530,10 +538,6 @@ static int tcp_splice_forward(struct ctx *c,
> > > > break;
> > > >
> > > > conn->pending[fromsidei] -= written;
> > > > -
> > > > - if (conn->events & FIN_RCVD(fromsidei) &&
> > > > - !conn->pending[fromsidei])
> > > > - break;
> > >
> > > The rest of the series looks good to me and I'm running tests now
> > > before pushing, but I can't convince myself of the correctness of this
> > > change.
> > >
> > > The first part makes sense as an additional condition to exit the loop
> > > and avoid an additional splice() call that would just return EAGAIN.
> > >
> > > But this one is a different condition because it happens to check
> > > conn->pending[fromsidei] right after we subtracted 'written' from it,
> > > and we know we have no input data anymore, so it avoids a useless
> > > (although I think harmless) read-side splice() call in the next
> > > iteration of the loop, doesn't it?
> >
> > Good point. If there was data in the pipe before the read-splice(),
> > then we get EOF, then we empty the pipe with the write-splice() we
> > know we're done and don't need to read-splice() again.
> >
> > I'm also pretty sure it's harmless, as long as repeated read-splice()s
> > after EOF return either EOF again or EAGAIN, and I can't really see it
> > doing anything else.
> >
> > Given that, and the fact you're already testing, I guess it makes more
> > sense to do a fixup on top, rather than respinning?
>
> But the commit message of this one would still be misleading because
> we're not actually "moving" the condition, and the fix-up would just
> add back these four lines (I guess?), so I think it would be more
> practical if you could send a new version of 8/8 only (you can base it
> on 7/8).
Sure, will do.
--
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
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-04 10:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-28 5:02 [PATCH 0/8] splice() forwarding cleanups David Gibson
2026-05-28 5:02 ` [PATCH 1/8] tcp_splice: Remove never-invoked SO_RCVLOWAT logic David Gibson
2026-05-28 5:02 ` [PATCH 2/8] tcp_splice: Simplify EPOLLRDHUP / eof / FIN handling David Gibson
2026-05-28 5:02 ` [PATCH 3/8] tcp_splice: Improve EOF exit condition for the loop David Gibson
2026-05-28 5:02 ` [PATCH 4/8] tcp_splice: Remove goto from forwarding loop David Gibson
2026-05-28 5:02 ` [PATCH 5/8] tcp_splice: Simplify shutdown(2) handling David Gibson
2026-05-28 5:02 ` [PATCH 6/8] tcp_splice: Simplify / correct OUT_WAIT flag handling David Gibson
2026-06-04 4:41 ` Stefano Brivio
2026-06-04 5:14 ` David Gibson
2026-05-28 5:02 ` [PATCH 7/8] tcp_splice: Remove questionable "optimisation" of pending bytes tracking David Gibson
2026-06-04 4:41 ` Stefano Brivio
2026-06-04 5:14 ` David Gibson
2026-05-28 5:02 ` [PATCH 8/8] tcp_splice: Exit forwarding earlier when stalled read side David Gibson
2026-06-04 4:41 ` Stefano Brivio
2026-06-04 5:26 ` David Gibson
2026-06-04 5:44 ` Stefano Brivio
2026-06-04 7:08 ` David Gibson [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aiEkUFbQ_Z9tt7lJ@zatzit \
--to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
--cc=passt-dev@passt.top \
--cc=sbrivio@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://passt.top/passt
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for IMAP folder(s).