lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 33/33] Add Xen virtual block device driver.
Dave Boutcher wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:00:33 -0700, Chris Wright <chrisw@sous-sol.org> said:
>
>> The block device frontend driver allows the kernel to access block
>> devices exported exported by a virtual machine containing a physical
>> block device driver.
>>
>
> First, I think this belongs in drivers/block (and the network driver
> belongs in drivers/net). If we're going to bring xen to the party,
> lets not leave it hiding out in a corner.
>
>
>> +static void connect(struct blkfront_info *);
>> +static void blkfront_closing(struct xenbus_device *);
>> +static int blkfront_remove(struct xenbus_device *);
>> +static int talk_to_backend(struct xenbus_device *, struct blkfront_info *);
>> +static int setup_blkring(struct xenbus_device *, struct blkfront_info *);
>> +
>> +static void kick_pending_request_queues(struct blkfront_info *);
>> +
>> +static irqreturn_t blkif_int(int irq, void *dev_id, struct pt_regs *ptregs);
>> +static void blkif_restart_queue(void *arg);
>> +static void blkif_recover(struct blkfront_info *);
>> +static void blkif_completion(struct blk_shadow *);
>> +static void blkif_free(struct blkfront_info *, int);
>>
>
> I'm pretty sure you can rearrange the code to get rid of the forward
> references.
>
>
>> +/**
>> + * We are reconnecting to the backend, due to a suspend/resume, or a backend
>> + * driver restart. We tear down our blkif structure and recreate it, but
>> + * leave the device-layer structures intact so that this is transparent to the
>> + * rest of the kernel.
>> + */
>> +static int blkfront_resume(struct xenbus_device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct blkfront_info *info = dev->dev.driver_data;
>> + int err;
>> +
>> + DPRINTK("blkfront_resume: %s\n", dev->nodename);
>> +
>> + blkif_free(info, 1);
>> +
>> + err = talk_to_backend(dev, info);
>> + if (!err)
>> + blkif_recover(info);
>> +
>> + return err;
>> +}
>>
> Should blkfront_resume grab blkif_io_lock?
>

There should be no concurrent activity until info->connected has been
set to BLKIF_STATE_CONNECTED, which doesn't happen until blkif_recover
has completed successfully. blkif_queue_request and blkif_int both test
the connection state before doing anything. (Not sure if a concurrent
XenBus event can happen though.)

>
>> +static inline int GET_ID_FROM_FREELIST(
>> + struct blkfront_info *info)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long free = info->shadow_free;
>> + BUG_ON(free > BLK_RING_SIZE);
>> + info->shadow_free = info->shadow[free].req.id;
>> + info->shadow[free].req.id = 0x0fffffee; /* debug */
>> + return free;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void ADD_ID_TO_FREELIST(
>> + struct blkfront_info *info, unsigned long id)
>> +{
>> + info->shadow[id].req.id = info->shadow_free;
>> + info->shadow[id].request = 0;
>> + info->shadow_free = id;
>> +}
>>
>
> A real nit..but why are these routines SHOUTING?
>
>
>> +int blkif_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *filep)
>> +{
>> + struct blkfront_info *info = inode->i_bdev->bd_disk->private_data;
>> + info->users--;
>> + if (info->users == 0) {
>>
>
> Hrm...this strikes me as racey. Don't you need at least a memory
> barrier here to handle SMP?
>
Hm. Doesn't look good to me.

>> +static struct xlbd_major_info xvd_major_info = {
>> + .major = 201,
>> + .type = &xvd_type_info
>> +};
>>
>
> I've forgotten what the current policy is around new major numbers.
>
This is wrong. 201 is allocated to Veritas, but 202 has been allocated
for the Xen VBD.

J

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-07-19 00:59    [W:0.209 / U:27.716 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site