Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Thu, 11 Jul 2019 14:25:54 -0700, John Fastabend wrote: > > Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > On Thu, 11 Jul 2019 09:47:16 -0700, John Fastabend wrote: > > > > Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 10 Jul 2019 12:34:17 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > > > > > > > + if (sk->sk_prot->unhash) > > > > > > > > > + sk->sk_prot->unhash(sk); > > > > > > > > > + } > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > > > + ctx = tls_get_ctx(sk); > > > > > > > > > + if (ctx->tx_conf == TLS_SW || ctx->rx_conf == TLS_SW) > > > > > > > > > + tls_sk_proto_cleanup(sk, ctx, timeo); > > > > > > > > > > Do we still need to hook into unhash? With patch 6 in place perhaps we > > > > > can just do disconnect 🥺 > > > > > > > > ?? "can just do a disconnect", not sure I folow. We still need unhash > > > > in cases where we have a TLS socket transition from ESTABLISHED > > > > to LISTEN state without calling close(). This is independent of if > > > > sockmap is running or not. > > > > > > > > Originally, I thought this would be extremely rare but I did see it > > > > in real applications on the sockmap side so presumably it is possible > > > > here as well. > > > > > > Ugh, sorry, I meant shutdown. Instead of replacing the unhash callback > > > replace the shutdown callback. We probably shouldn't release the socket > > > lock either there, but we can sleep, so I'll be able to run the device > > > connection remove callback (which sleep). > > > > ah OK seems doable to me. Do you want to write that on top of this > > series? Or would you like to push it onto your branch and I can pull > > it in push the rest of the patches on top and send it out? I think > > if you can get to it in the next few days then it makes sense to wait. > > Mm.. perhaps its easiest if we forget about HW for now and get SW > to work? Once you get the SW to 100% I can probably figure out what > to do for HW, but I feel like we got too many moving parts ATM. Hi Jack, I went ahead and pushed a v3 with your patches at the front. This resolves a set of issues for me so I think it makes sense to push now and look to resolve any further issues later. I'll look into the close with pending data potential issue to see if it is/is-not a real issue. Thanks, John
