| 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: <5933887D.5080708@redhat.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2017 23:11:41 -0500
From: Mike Christie <mchristi@...hat.com>
To: lixiubo@...s.chinamobile.com, nab@...ux-iscsi.org
Cc: agrover@...hat.com, namei.unix@...il.com, sheng@...ker.org,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, target-devel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcmu: Add fifo type waiter list support to avoid
starvation
On 05/04/2017 09:51 PM, lixiubo@...s.chinamobile.com wrote:
> From: Xiubo Li <lixiubo@...s.chinamobile.com>
>
> The fifo type waiter list will hold the udevs who are waiting for the
> blocks from the data global pool. The unmap thread will try to feed the
> first udevs in waiter list, if the global free blocks available are
> not enough, it will stop traversing the list and abort waking up the
> others.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <lixiubo@...s.chinamobile.com>
> ---
> drivers/target/target_core_user.c | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/target/target_core_user.c b/drivers/target/target_core_user.c
> index 9045837..10c99e7 100644
> --- a/drivers/target/target_core_user.c
> +++ b/drivers/target/target_core_user.c
> @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ struct tcmu_hba {
>
> struct tcmu_dev {
> struct list_head node;
> + struct list_head waiter;
>
> struct se_device se_dev;
>
> @@ -123,7 +124,7 @@ struct tcmu_dev {
> wait_queue_head_t wait_cmdr;
> struct mutex cmdr_lock;
>
> - bool waiting_global;
> + uint32_t waiting_blocks;
> uint32_t dbi_max;
> uint32_t dbi_thresh;
> DECLARE_BITMAP(data_bitmap, DATA_BLOCK_BITS);
> @@ -165,6 +166,10 @@ struct tcmu_cmd {
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(root_udev_mutex);
> static LIST_HEAD(root_udev);
>
> +/* The data blocks global pool waiter list */
> +static DEFINE_MUTEX(root_udev_waiter_mutex);
Sorry for the delay.
Could you just add a comment about the lock ordering. It will be helpful
to new engineers/reviewers to check for errors.
> +static LIST_HEAD(root_udev_waiter);
> +
> static atomic_t global_db_count = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
>
> static struct kmem_cache *tcmu_cmd_cache;
> @@ -195,6 +200,11 @@ enum tcmu_multicast_groups {
> #define tcmu_cmd_set_dbi(cmd, index) ((cmd)->dbi[(cmd)->dbi_cur++] = (index))
> #define tcmu_cmd_get_dbi(cmd) ((cmd)->dbi[(cmd)->dbi_cur++])
>
> +static inline bool is_in_waiter_list(struct tcmu_dev *udev)
> +{
> + return !!udev->waiting_blocks;
> +}
> +
> static void tcmu_cmd_free_data(struct tcmu_cmd *tcmu_cmd, uint32_t len)
> {
> struct tcmu_dev *udev = tcmu_cmd->tcmu_dev;
> @@ -250,8 +260,6 @@ static bool tcmu_get_empty_blocks(struct tcmu_dev *udev,
> {
> int i;
>
> - udev->waiting_global = false;
> -
> for (i = tcmu_cmd->dbi_cur; i < tcmu_cmd->dbi_cnt; i++) {
> if (!tcmu_get_empty_block(udev, tcmu_cmd))
> goto err;
> @@ -259,9 +267,7 @@ static bool tcmu_get_empty_blocks(struct tcmu_dev *udev,
> return true;
>
> err:
> - udev->waiting_global = true;
> - /* Try to wake up the unmap thread */
> - wake_up(&unmap_wait);
> + udev->waiting_blocks += tcmu_cmd->dbi_cnt - i;
> return false;
> }
>
> @@ -671,6 +677,7 @@ static inline size_t tcmu_cmd_get_cmd_size(struct tcmu_cmd *tcmu_cmd,
>
> while (!is_ring_space_avail(udev, tcmu_cmd, command_size, data_length)) {
> int ret;
> + bool is_waiting_blocks = !!udev->waiting_blocks;
You can use your helper is_in_waiter_list().
> DEFINE_WAIT(__wait);
>
> prepare_to_wait(&udev->wait_cmdr, &__wait, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE);
> @@ -688,6 +695,18 @@ static inline size_t tcmu_cmd_get_cmd_size(struct tcmu_cmd *tcmu_cmd,
> return TCM_LOGICAL_UNIT_COMMUNICATION_FAILURE;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * Try to insert the current udev to waiter list and
> + * then wake up the unmap thread
> + */
> + if (is_waiting_blocks) {
> + mutex_lock(&root_udev_waiter_mutex);
> + list_add_tail(&udev->waiter, &root_udev_waiter);
> + mutex_unlock(&root_udev_waiter_mutex);
> +
> + wake_up(&unmap_wait);
> + }
Is this supposed to go before the schedule_timeout call?
If we are here and schedule_timeout returned non zero then our wait_cmdr
has been woken up from the unmap thread because it freed some space, so
we do not want to again add ourself and call unmap again.
> +
> mutex_lock(&udev->cmdr_lock);
>
> /* We dropped cmdr_lock, cmd_head is stale */
> @@ -902,8 +921,6 @@ static unsigned int tcmu_handle_completions(struct tcmu_dev *udev)
> if (mb->cmd_tail == mb->cmd_head)
> del_timer(&udev->timeout); /* no more pending cmds */
>
> - wake_up(&udev->wait_cmdr);
> -
> return handled;
> }
>
> @@ -996,7 +1013,17 @@ static int tcmu_irqcontrol(struct uio_info *info, s32 irq_on)
> struct tcmu_dev *tcmu_dev = container_of(info, struct tcmu_dev, uio_info);
>
> mutex_lock(&tcmu_dev->cmdr_lock);
> - tcmu_handle_completions(tcmu_dev);
> + /*
> + * If the current udev is also in waiter list, this will
> + * make sure that the other waiters in list be feeded ahead
> + * of it.
> + */
> + if (is_in_waiter_list(tcmu_dev)) {
> + wake_up(&unmap_wait);
> + } else {
> + tcmu_handle_completions(tcmu_dev);
> + wake_up(&tcmu_dev->wait_cmdr);
> + }
> mutex_unlock(&tcmu_dev->cmdr_lock);
>
> return 0;
> @@ -1231,7 +1258,7 @@ static int tcmu_configure_device(struct se_device *dev)
> udev->data_off = CMDR_SIZE;
> udev->data_size = DATA_SIZE;
> udev->dbi_thresh = 0; /* Default in Idle state */
> - udev->waiting_global = false;
> + udev->waiting_blocks = 0;
>
> /* Initialise the mailbox of the ring buffer */
> mb = udev->mb_addr;
> @@ -1345,6 +1372,13 @@ static void tcmu_free_device(struct se_device *dev)
> list_del(&udev->node);
> mutex_unlock(&root_udev_mutex);
>
> + mutex_lock(&root_udev_waiter_mutex);
> + mutex_lock(&udev->cmdr_lock);
> + if (is_in_waiter_list(udev))
> + list_del(&udev->waiter);
> + mutex_unlock(&udev->cmdr_lock);
> + mutex_unlock(&root_udev_waiter_mutex);
> +
> vfree(udev->mb_addr);
>
> /* Upper layer should drain all requests before calling this */
> @@ -1550,6 +1584,7 @@ static int unmap_thread_fn(void *data)
> struct tcmu_dev *udev;
> loff_t off;
> uint32_t start, end, block;
> + static uint32_t free_blocks;
> struct page *page;
> int i;
>
> @@ -1571,7 +1606,7 @@ static int unmap_thread_fn(void *data)
> tcmu_handle_completions(udev);
>
> /* Skip the udevs waiting the global pool or in idle */
> - if (udev->waiting_global || !udev->dbi_thresh) {
> + if (is_in_waiter_list(udev) || !udev->dbi_thresh) {
> mutex_unlock(&udev->cmdr_lock);
> continue;
> }
> @@ -1607,17 +1642,32 @@ static int unmap_thread_fn(void *data)
> }
> }
> mutex_unlock(&udev->cmdr_lock);
> +
> + free_blocks += end - start;
> }
> + mutex_unlock(&root_udev_mutex);
>
> /*
> * Try to wake up the udevs who are waiting
> - * for the global data pool.
> + * for the global data pool blocks.
> */
> - list_for_each_entry(udev, &root_udev, node) {
> - if (udev->waiting_global)
> - wake_up(&udev->wait_cmdr);
> + mutex_lock(&root_udev_waiter_mutex);
> + list_for_each_entry(udev, &root_udev_waiter, waiter) {
> + mutex_lock(&udev->cmdr_lock);
> + if (udev->waiting_blocks < free_blocks) {
> + mutex_unlock(&udev->cmdr_lock);
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + free_blocks -= udev->waiting_blocks;
> + udev->waiting_blocks = 0;
> + mutex_unlock(&udev->cmdr_lock);
> +
> + list_del(&udev->waiter);
> +
> + wake_up(&udev->wait_cmdr);
> }
> - mutex_unlock(&root_udev_mutex);
> + mutex_unlock(&root_udev_waiter_mutex);
> }
>
> return 0;
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists