netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V2 1/2] xen-netback: split event channels support for Xen backend driver

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 22 May 2013 16:50:55 +0100
From:	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>
To:	annie li <annie.li@...cle.com>
CC:	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>, <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
	<konrad.wilk@...cle.com>, <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2 1/2] xen-netback: split event channels
 support for Xen backend driver

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:40:41AM -0400, annie li wrote:
> 
> On 2013-5-21 14:35, Wei Liu wrote:
> >[....]
> >+
> >  static int xenvif_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
> >  {
> >  	struct xenvif *vif = netdev_priv(dev);
> >@@ -125,13 +143,15 @@ static struct net_device_stats *xenvif_get_stats(struct net_device *dev)
> >  static void xenvif_up(struct xenvif *vif)
> >  {
> >  	xen_netbk_add_xenvif(vif);
> >-	enable_irq(vif->irq);
> >+	enable_irq(vif->tx_irq);
> >+	enable_irq(vif->rx_irq);
> 
> enable_irq are called twice in one event channel situation. How
> about adding if condition here to differ one event channel and split
> event channel?
> 

Sure, if this makes code better comprehensible.

> >+	/* Try split event channels first, then single event channel. */
> >+	err = xenbus_gather(XBT_NIL, dev->otherend,
> >+			    "event-channel-tx", "%u", &tx_evtchn,
> >+			    "event-channel-rx", "%u", &rx_evtchn, NULL);
> >+	if (err) {
> >+		err = xenbus_gather(XBT_NIL, dev->otherend,
> >+				    "event-channel", "%u", &tx_evtchn, NULL);
> >+		if (err) {
> >+			xenbus_dev_fatal(dev, err,
> >+					 "reading %s/event-channel(-tx/rx)",
> >+					 dev->otherend);
> 
> This err really comes from reading original implementation(one event
> channel), right? So it is better to not use (-tx/rx) here?
> Or using two xenbus_dev_fatal to print log: one for reading tx/rx
> failure, the other for one event channel failure.
> 

The failure of reading split event channels doesn't imply a fatal error.
Here the fatal error is trying to read both split event channels and
single event channel and fail.

If people really want to debug this problem, they should look at
xenstore entries instead of relying on this log message.


Wei.

> Thanks
> Annie
--
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