[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49D280C0.8010802@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 23:44:48 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, agraf@...e.de, pmullaney@...ell.com,
pmorreale@...ell.com, anthony@...emonkey.ws, rusty@...tcorp.com.au,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/17] shm-signal: shared-memory signals
Gregory Haskins wrote:
> This interface provides a bidirectional shared-memory based signaling
> mechanism. It can be used by any entities which desire efficient
> communication via shared memory. The implementation details of the
> signaling are abstracted so that they may transcend a wide variety
> of locale boundaries (e.g. userspace/kernel, guest/host, etc).
>
> The shm_signal mechanism supports event masking as well as spurious
> event delivery mitigation.
> +
> +/*
> + *---------
> + * The following structures represent data that is shared across boundaries
> + * which may be quite disparate from one another (e.g. Windows vs Linux,
> + * 32 vs 64 bit, etc). Therefore, care has been taken to make sure they
> + * present data in a manner that is independent of the environment.
> + *-----------
> + */
> +
> +#define SHM_SIGNAL_MAGIC 0x58fa39df
> +#define SHM_SIGNAL_VER 1
> +
> +struct shm_signal_irq {
> + __u8 enabled;
> + __u8 pending;
> + __u8 dirty;
> +};
>
Some ABIs may choose to pad this, suggest explicit padding.
> +
> +enum shm_signal_locality {
> + shm_locality_north,
> + shm_locality_south,
> +};
> +
> +struct shm_signal_desc {
> + __u32 magic;
> + __u32 ver;
> + struct shm_signal_irq irq[2];
> +};
>
Similarly, this should be padded to 0 (mod 8).
Instead of versions, I prefer feature flags which can be independently
enabled or disabled.
> +
> +/* --- END SHARED STRUCTURES --- */
> +
> +#ifdef __KERNEL__
> +
> +#include <linux/interrupt.h>
> +
> +struct shm_signal_notifier {
> + void (*signal)(struct shm_signal_notifier *);
> +};
>
This means "->inject() has been called from the other side"?
(reading below I see this is so. not used to reading well commented
code... :)
> +
> +struct shm_signal;
> +
> +struct shm_signal_ops {
> + int (*inject)(struct shm_signal *s);
> + void (*fault)(struct shm_signal *s, const char *fmt, ...);
>
Eww. Must we involve strings and printf formats?
> + void (*release)(struct shm_signal *s);
> +};
> +
> +/*
> + * signaling protocol:
> + *
> + * each side of the shm_signal has an "irq" structure with the following
> + * fields:
> + *
> + * - enabled: controlled by shm_signal_enable/disable() to mask/unmask
> + * the notification locally
> + * - dirty: indicates if the shared-memory is dirty or clean. This
> + * is updated regardless of the enabled/pending state so that
> + * the state is always accurately tracked.
> + * - pending: indicates if a signal is pending to the remote locale.
> + * This allows us to determine if a remote-notification is
> + * already in flight to optimize spurious notifications away.
> + */
>
When you overlay a ring on top of this, won't the ring indexes convey
the same information as ->dirty?
--
I have a truly marvellous patch that fixes the bug which this
signature is too narrow to contain.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists