[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090827065251.GB3218@amit-x200.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:22:51 +0530
From: Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>
To: Michael Ellerman <michael@...erman.id.au>
Cc: qemu-devel@...gnu.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, borntraeger@...ibm.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, miltonm@....com,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, brueckner@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
alan@...ux.intel.com, Ryan Arnold <rsa@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Extending virtio_console to support multiple ports
On (Thu) Aug 27 2009 [15:04:45], Michael Ellerman wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 21:15 +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> > [cc'ing some people who have made some commits in hvc_console.c]
> >
> > On (Wed) Aug 26 2009 [16:57:18], Amit Shah wrote:
> > > On (Tue) Aug 25 2009 [11:47:20], Amit Shah wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello all,
> > > >
> > > > Here is a new iteration of the patch series that implements a
> > > > transport for guest and host communications.
> > > >
> > > > The code has been updated to reuse the virtio-console device instead
> > > > of creating a new virtio-serial device.
> > >
> > > And the problem now is that hvc calls the put_chars function with
> > > spinlocks held and we now allocate pages in send_buf(), called from
> > > put_chars.
> > >
> > > A few solutions:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> > > - Convert hvc's usage of spinlocks to mutexes. I've no idea how this
> > > will play out; I'm no expert here. But I did try doing this and so far
> > > it all looks OK. No lockups, lockdep warnings, nothing. I have full
> > > debugging enabled. But this doesn't mean it's right.
> >
> > So just to test this further I added the capability to have more than
> > one hvc console spawn from virtio_console, created two consoles and did
> > a 'cat' of a file in each of the virtio-consoles. It's been running for
> > half an hour now without any badness. No spew in debug logs too.
> >
> > I also checked the code in hvc_console.c that takes the spin_locks.
> > Nothing there that runs from (or needs to run from) interrupt context.
> > So the change to mutexes does seem reasonable. Also, the spinlock code
> > was added really long back -- git blame shows Linus' first git commit
> > introduced them in the git history, so it's pure legacy baggage.
>
> I won't tell Ryan you called his code "pure legacy baggage" if you
> don't ;)
>
> http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/torvalds/old-2.6-bkcvs.git;a=commitdiff;h=d450b4ae023fb4be175389c18f4f87677da03020
Thanks for the link!
(and this general area might be the one that doesn't get major upheavals
in 5-yr spans :-)
Amit
--
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