Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 5 Dec 2019 21:43:43 +0100 | From | Valentin Vidić <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] net/tls: Fix return values to avoid ENOTSUPP |
| |
On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 03:06:55PM -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote: > On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 2:34 PM Jakub Kicinski > <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 5 Dec 2019 07:41:18 +0100, Valentin Vidic wrote: > > > ENOTSUPP is not available in userspace, for example: > > > > > > setsockopt failed, 524, Unknown error 524 > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Valentin Vidic <vvidic@valentin-vidic.from.hr> > > > > > diff --git a/net/tls/tls_device.c b/net/tls/tls_device.c > > > index 0683788bbef0..cd91ad812291 100644 > > > --- a/net/tls/tls_device.c > > > +++ b/net/tls/tls_device.c > > > @@ -429,7 +429,7 @@ static int tls_push_data(struct sock *sk, > > > > > > if (flags & > > > ~(MSG_MORE | MSG_DONTWAIT | MSG_NOSIGNAL | MSG_SENDPAGE_NOTLAST)) > > > - return -ENOTSUPP; > > > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > > > > > if (unlikely(sk->sk_err)) > > > return -sk->sk_err; > > > @@ -571,7 +571,7 @@ int tls_device_sendpage(struct sock *sk, struct page *page, > > > lock_sock(sk); > > > > > > if (flags & MSG_OOB) { > > > - rc = -ENOTSUPP; > > > + rc = -EOPNOTSUPP; > > > > Perhaps the flag checks should return EINVAL? Willem any opinions? > > No strong opinion. Judging from do_tcp_sendpages MSG_OOB is a > supported flag in general for sendpage, so signaling that the TLS > variant cannot support that otherwise valid request sounds fine to me.
I based these on the description from the sendmsg manpage, but you decide:
EOPNOTSUPP Some bit in the flags argument is inappropriate for the socket type.
> > > diff --git a/net/tls/tls_main.c b/net/tls/tls_main.c > > > index bdca31ffe6da..5830b8e02a36 100644 > > > --- a/net/tls/tls_main.c > > > +++ b/net/tls/tls_main.c > > > @@ -496,7 +496,7 @@ static int do_tls_setsockopt_conf(struct sock *sk, char __user *optval, > > > /* check version */ > > > if (crypto_info->version != TLS_1_2_VERSION && > > > crypto_info->version != TLS_1_3_VERSION) { > > > - rc = -ENOTSUPP; > > > + rc = -EINVAL; > > > > This one I think Willem asked to be EOPNOTSUPP OTOH. > > Indeed (assuming no one disagrees). Based on the same rationale: the > request may be valid, it just cannot be accommodated (yet).
In this case other checks in the same function like crypto_info->cipher_type return EINVAL, so I used the same here.
-- Valentin
| |