[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110504155624.GB15648@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 18:56:24 +0300
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 4/8]vhost: vhost TX zero-copy support
On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 08:18:04AM -0700, Shirley Ma wrote:
> > > +void vhost_zerocopy_callback(struct sk_buff *skb)
> > > +{
> > > + int idx = skb_shinfo(skb)->ubuf.desc;
> > > + struct vhost_virtqueue *vq = skb_shinfo(skb)->ubuf.arg;
> > > +
> > > + /* set len = 1 to mark this desc buffers done DMA */
> > > + vq->heads[idx].len = 1;
> > > +}
> >
> > So any kind of callback like that, that goes into the skb,
> > will be racy wrt module unloading because module can go away
> > after you mark dma done and before this function returns.
> > Solution is to have a core function that does the
> > final signalling (e.g. sock_wfree is in core).
> > Would be nice to fix, even though this race is
> > completely theoretical, I don't believe it will
> > trigger in practice.
>
> I run lots of stress tests, and never hit this.
>
> But I can try to fix it.
Yes, it's a theoretical thing. Nice to have but not a must.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists