Commit 00e158fb authored by Tony Lu's avatar Tony Lu Committed by David S. Miller

net/smc: Keep smc_close_final rc during active close

When smc_close_final() returns error, the return code overwrites by
kernel_sock_shutdown() in smc_close_active(). The return code of
smc_close_final() is more important than kernel_sock_shutdown(), and it
will pass to userspace directly.

Fix it by keeping both return codes, if smc_close_final() raises an
error, return it or kernel_sock_shutdown()'s.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-s390/1f67548e-cbf6-0dce-82b5-10288a4583bd@linux.ibm.com/
Fixes: 606a63c9 ("net/smc: Ensure the active closing peer first closes clcsock")
Suggested-by: default avatarKarsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarTony Lu <tonylu@linux.alibaba.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarWen Gu <guwen@linux.alibaba.com>
Acked-by: default avatarKarsten Graul <kgraul@linux.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
parent 5b085601
...@@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ int smc_close_active(struct smc_sock *smc) ...@@ -195,6 +195,7 @@ int smc_close_active(struct smc_sock *smc)
int old_state; int old_state;
long timeout; long timeout;
int rc = 0; int rc = 0;
int rc1 = 0;
timeout = current->flags & PF_EXITING ? timeout = current->flags & PF_EXITING ?
0 : sock_flag(sk, SOCK_LINGER) ? 0 : sock_flag(sk, SOCK_LINGER) ?
...@@ -232,8 +233,11 @@ int smc_close_active(struct smc_sock *smc) ...@@ -232,8 +233,11 @@ int smc_close_active(struct smc_sock *smc)
/* actively shutdown clcsock before peer close it, /* actively shutdown clcsock before peer close it,
* prevent peer from entering TIME_WAIT state. * prevent peer from entering TIME_WAIT state.
*/ */
if (smc->clcsock && smc->clcsock->sk) if (smc->clcsock && smc->clcsock->sk) {
rc = kernel_sock_shutdown(smc->clcsock, SHUT_RDWR); rc1 = kernel_sock_shutdown(smc->clcsock,
SHUT_RDWR);
rc = rc ? rc : rc1;
}
} else { } else {
/* peer event has changed the state */ /* peer event has changed the state */
goto again; goto again;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment