On Tue, May 05, 2026 at 07:14:36AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, May 5, 2026 at 6:52 AM Stefano Garzarella <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 30, 2026 at 12:26:52PM +0000, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > >virtio_transport_inc_rx_pkt() checks vvs->rx_bytes + len > vvs->buf_alloc.
> > >
> > >virtio_transport_recv_enqueue() skips coalescing for packets
> > >with VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOM.
> > >
> > >If fed with packets with len == 0 and VIRTIO_VSOCK_SEQ_EOM,
> > >a very large number of packets can be queued
> > >because vvs->rx_bytes stays at 0.
> > >
> > >Fix this by estimating the skb metadata size:
> > >
> > > (Number of skbs in the queue) * SKB_TRUESIZE(0)
> > >
> > >Fixes: 077706165717 ("virtio/vsock: don't use skbuff state to account
credit")
> > >Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <[email protected]>
> > >Cc: Arseniy Krasnov <[email protected]>
> > >Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi <[email protected]>
> > >Cc: Stefano Garzarella <[email protected]>
> > >Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <[email protected]>
> > >Cc: Jason Wang <[email protected]>
> > >Cc: Xuan Zhuo <[email protected]>
> > >Cc: "Eugenio Pérez" <[email protected]>
> > >Cc: [email protected]
> > >Cc: [email protected]
> > >---
> > > net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c | 4 +++-
> > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > >diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> > >index
416d533f493d7b07e9c77c43f741d28cfcd0953e..9b8014516f4fb1130ae184635fbba4dfee58bd64 100644
> > >--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> > >+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport_common.c
> > >@@ -447,7 +447,9 @@ static int virtio_transport_send_pkt_info(struct
vsock_sock *vsk,
> > > static bool virtio_transport_inc_rx_pkt(struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs,
> > > u32 len)
> > > {
> > >- if (vvs->buf_used + len > vvs->buf_alloc)
> > >+ u64 skb_overhead = (skb_queue_len(&vvs->rx_queue) + 1) *
SKB_TRUESIZE(0);
> > >+
> > >+ if (skb_overhead + vvs->buf_used + len > vvs->buf_alloc)
> > > return false;
> >
> > I'm not sure about this fix, I mean that maybe this is incomplete.
> > In virtio-vsock, there is a credit mechanism between the two peers:
> >
https://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.3/csd01/virtio-v1.3-csd01.html#x1-4850003
> >
> > This takes only the payload into account, so it’s true that this problem
> > exists; however, perhaps we should also inform the other peer of a lower
> > credit balance, otherwise the other peer will believe it has much more
> > credit than it actually does, send a large payload, and then the packet
> > will be discarded and the data lost (there are no retransmissions,
> > etc.).
>
> I dunno, perhaps revert 077706165717 ("virtio/vsock: don't use skbuff
> state to account credit")
> and find a better fix then?
IIRC the same issue was there before the commit fixed by that one (commit
71dc9ec9ac7d ("virtio/vsock: replace virtio_vsock_pkt with sk_buff")), so
not sure about reverting it TBH.
CCing Arseniy and Bobby.
>
> There is always a discrepancy between skb->len and skb->truesize.
> You will not be able to announce a 1MB window, and accept one milliion
> skb of 1-byte each.
>
> This kind of contract is broken.
>
Yep, I agree, but before we start discarding data (and losing it), IMHO we
should at least inform the other peer that we're out of space.
@Stefan, @Michael, do you think we can do something in the spec to avoid
this issue and in some way take into account also the metadata in the
credit. I mean to avoid the 1-byte packets flooding.
Thanks,
Stefano
