[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v2 06/18] xen/pvcalls: handle commands from the frontend
On Fri, 26 May 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > On 05/19/2017 07:22 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > > + > > static void pvcalls_back_work(struct work_struct *work) > > { > > + struct pvcalls_back_priv *priv = container_of(work, > > + struct pvcalls_back_priv, register_work); > > + int notify, notify_all = 0, more = 1; > > + struct xen_pvcalls_request req; > > + struct xenbus_device *dev = priv->dev; > > + > > + atomic_set(&priv->work, 1); > > + > > + while (more || !atomic_dec_and_test(&priv->work)) { > > + while (RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS(&priv->ring)) { > > + RING_COPY_REQUEST(&priv->ring, > > + priv->ring.req_cons++, > > + &req); > > + > > + if (!pvcalls_back_handle_cmd(dev, &req)) { > > + RING_PUSH_RESPONSES_AND_CHECK_NOTIFY( > > + &priv->ring, notify); > > + notify_all += notify; > > + } > > + } > > + > > + if (notify_all) > > + notify_remote_via_irq(priv->irq); > > + > > + RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS(&priv->ring, more); > > + } > > } > > > > static irqreturn_t pvcalls_back_event(int irq, void *dev_id) > > { > > + struct xenbus_device *dev = dev_id; > > + struct pvcalls_back_priv *priv = NULL; > > + > > + if (dev == NULL) > > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > > + > > + priv = dev_get_drvdata(&dev->dev); > > + if (priv == NULL) > > + return IRQ_HANDLED; > > + > > + atomic_inc(&priv->work); > > I will paste you response here from v1 --- I thought I understood it and > now I don't anymore. > > >> > >> Is this really needed? We have a new entry on the ring, so the outer > loop in > >> pvcalls_back_work() will pick this up (by setting 'more'). > > > > This is to avoid race conditions. A notification could be delivered > > after RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS is called, returning more == 0, but > > before pvcalls_back_work completes. In that case, without priv->work, > > pvcalls_back_work wouldn't be rescheduled because it is still running > > and the work would be left undone. > > > How is this different from the case when new work comes after the outer > loop is done but we still haven't returned from pvcalls_back_work()? It is the same case. In fact, looking at it more closely, I think that priv->work in its current form makes it more unlikely to happen, but doesn't prevent it completely :-( Given that I have been trying to reproduce the race in many ways but always failed so far, I think this race is only theoretical. I have removed the priv->work construct, and added a in-code comment about the race. > > + queue_work(priv->wq, &priv->register_work); > > + > > return IRQ_HANDLED; > > } _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |