[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1706141342420.12156@sstabellini-ThinkPad-X260>
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 14:03:08 -0700 (PDT)
From: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>
To: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com>
cc: Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@...nel.org>,
xen-devel@...ts.xen.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
jgross@...e.com, Stefano Stabellini <stefano@...reto.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/18] xen/pvcalls: handle commands from the
frontend
On Mon, 12 Jun 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> > +
> > static void pvcalls_back_work(struct work_struct *work)
> > {
> > + struct pvcalls_fedata *priv = container_of(work,
> > + struct pvcalls_fedata, register_work);
> > + int notify, notify_all = 0, more = 1;
> > + struct xen_pvcalls_request req;
> > + struct xenbus_device *dev = priv->dev;
> > +
> > + while (more) {
> > + while (RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS(&priv->ring)) {
> > + RING_COPY_REQUEST(&priv->ring,
> > + priv->ring.req_cons++,
> > + &req);
> > +
> > + if (!pvcalls_back_handle_cmd(dev, &req)) {
> > + RING_PUSH_RESPONSES_AND_CHECK_NOTIFY(
> > + &priv->ring, notify);
> > + notify_all += notify;
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (notify_all)
> > + notify_remote_via_irq(priv->irq);
> > +
> > + RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS(&priv->ring, more);
> > + }
> > }
> >
> > static irqreturn_t pvcalls_back_event(int irq, void *dev_id)
> > {
> > + struct xenbus_device *dev = dev_id;
> > + struct pvcalls_fedata *priv = NULL;
> > +
> > + if (dev == NULL)
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +
> > + priv = dev_get_drvdata(&dev->dev);
> > + if (priv == NULL)
> > + return IRQ_HANDLED;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * TODO: a small theoretical race exists if we try to queue work
> > + * after pvcalls_back_work checked for final requests and before
> > + * it returns. The queuing will fail, and pvcalls_back_work
> > + * won't do the work because it is about to return. In that
> > + * case, we lose the notification.
> > + */
> > + queue_work(priv->wq, &priv->register_work);
>
> Would queuing delayed work (if queue_work() failed) help? And canceling
> it on next invocation of pvcalls_back_event()?
Looking at the implementation of queue_delayed_work_on and
queue_work_on, it looks like that if queue_work fails then also
queue_delayed_work would fail: they both test on
WORK_STRUCT_PENDING_BIT.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists