lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <5412D1E7.2080801@citrix.com> Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2014 11:58:47 +0100 From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com> To: Arianna Avanzini <avanzini.arianna@...il.com>, <konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>, <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> CC: <hch@...radead.org>, <bob.liu@...cle.com>, <felipe.franciosi@...rix.com>, <axboe@...com> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 5/5] xen, blkback: negotiate of the number of block rings with the frontend On 12/09/14 00:57, Arianna Avanzini wrote: > This commit lets the backend driver advertise the number of available > hardware queues; it also implements gathering from the frontend driver > the number of rings actually available for mapping. [...] > --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c > +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c > @@ -477,6 +477,34 @@ static void xen_vbd_free(struct xen_vbd *vbd) > vbd->bdev = NULL; > } > > +static int xen_advertise_hw_queues(struct xen_blkif *blkif, > + struct request_queue *q) > +{ > + struct xen_vbd *vbd = &blkif->vbd; > + struct xenbus_transaction xbt; > + int err; > + > + if (q && q->mq_ops) > + vbd->nr_supported_hw_queues = q->nr_hw_queues; > + > + err = xenbus_transaction_start(&xbt); > + if (err) { > + BUG_ON(!blkif->be); This BUG_ON() isn't useful. > + xenbus_dev_fatal(blkif->be->dev, err, "starting transaction (hw queues)"); > + return err; > + } > + > + err = xenbus_printf(xbt, blkif->be->dev->nodename, "nr_supported_hw_queues", "%u", > + blkif->vbd.nr_supported_hw_queues); > + if (err) > + xenbus_dev_error(blkif->be->dev, err, "writing %s/nr_supported_hw_queues", > + blkif->be->dev->nodename); > + > + xenbus_transaction_end(xbt, 0); Transactions are expensive and not needed to write a single key. Can you use the same key names as netback (multi-queue-max-queues I think)? I don't see why we can't use a common set of key names for this. See interface/io/netif.h for full set of keys VIFs use. David -- 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