[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] xen-blkback: Advertise feature-persistent as user requested
On 02/09/22 01:08PM, Juergen Gross wrote: > On 02.09.22 11:53, Pratyush Yadav wrote: > > On 31/08/22 04:58PM, SeongJae Park wrote: > > > The advertisement of the persistent grants feature (writing > > > 'feature-persistent' to xenbus) should mean not the decision for using > > > the feature but only the availability of the feature. However, commit > > > aac8a70db24b ("xen-blkback: add a parameter for disabling of persistent > > > grants") made a field of blkback, which was a place for saving only the > > > negotiation result, to be used for yet another purpose: caching of the > > > 'feature_persistent' parameter value. As a result, the advertisement, > > > which should follow only the parameter value, becomes inconsistent. > > > > > > This commit fixes the misuse of the semantic by making blkback saves the > > > parameter value in a separate place and advertises the support based on > > > only the saved value. > > > > > > Fixes: aac8a70db24b ("xen-blkback: add a parameter for disabling of > > > persistent grants") > > > Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 5.10.x > > > Suggested-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx> > > > Signed-off-by: SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h | 3 +++ > > > drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c | 6 ++++-- > > > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h > > > b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h > > > index bda5c815e441..a28473470e66 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h > > > +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/common.h > > > @@ -226,6 +226,9 @@ struct xen_vbd { > > > sector_t size; > > > unsigned int flush_support:1; > > > unsigned int discard_secure:1; > > > + /* Connect-time cached feature_persistent parameter value */ > > > + unsigned int feature_gnt_persistent_parm:1; > > > > Continuing over from the previous version: > > > > > > If feature_gnt_persistent_parm is always going to be equal to > > > > feature_persistent, then why introduce it at all? Why not just use > > > > feature_persistent directly? This way you avoid adding an extra flag > > > > whose purpose is not immediately clear, and you also avoid all the > > > > mess with setting this flag at the right time. > > > > > > Mainly because the parameter should read twice (once for > > > advertisement, and once later just before the negotitation, for > > > checking if we advertised or not), and the user might change the > > > parameter value between the two reads. > > > > > > For the detailed available sequence of the race, you could refer to the > > > prior conversation[1]. > > > > > > [1] > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/20200922111259.GJ19254@Air-de-Roger/ > > > > Okay, I see. Thanks for the pointer. But still, I think it would be > > better to not maintain two copies of the value. How about doing: > > > > blkif->vbd.feature_gnt_persistent = > > xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->nodename, "feature-persistent", 0) && > > xenbus_read_unsigned(dev->otherend, "feature-persistent", 0); > > > > This makes it quite clear that we only enable persistent grants if > > _both_ ends support it. We can do the same for blkfront. > > I prefer it as is, as it will not rely on nobody having modified the > Xenstore node (which would in theory be possible). Okay. In that case, Reviewed-by: Pratyush Yadav <ptyadav@xxxxxxxxx> -- Amazon Development Center Germany GmbH Krausenstr. 38 10117 Berlin Geschaeftsfuehrung: Christian Schlaeger, Jonathan Weiss Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg unter HRB 149173 B Sitz: Berlin Ust-ID: DE 289 237 879
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |