lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5 12/13] xen/pvcalls: implement release command
On Tue, 24 Oct 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> (I just noticed that I missed this patch, sorry)

Thanks for the review!


> On 10/06/2017 08:30 PM, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> > Send PVCALLS_RELEASE to the backend and wait for a reply. Take both
> > in_mutex and out_mutex to avoid concurrent accesses. Then, free the
> > socket.
> >
> > For passive sockets, check whether we have already pre-allocated an
> > active socket for the purpose of being accepted. If so, free that as
> > well.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stefano@aporeto.com>
> > CC: boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com
> > CC: jgross@suse.com
> > ---
> > drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c | 98 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.h | 1 +
> > 2 files changed, 99 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c
> > index aca2b32..9beb34d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c
> > +++ b/drivers/xen/pvcalls-front.c
> > @@ -200,6 +200,19 @@ static irqreturn_t pvcalls_front_event_handler(int irq, void *dev_id)
> > static void pvcalls_front_free_map(struct pvcalls_bedata *bedata,
> > struct sock_mapping *map)
> > {
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + unbind_from_irqhandler(map->active.irq, map);
> > +
> > + spin_lock(&bedata->socket_lock);
> > + if (!list_empty(&map->list))
> > + list_del_init(&map->list);
>
> As with patch 2, do you need to init this? In fact, do you need to do
> anything with the list? We are about to free the map (and so maybe bring
> 'kfree(map)" inside here, btw?)
>
> And what does it mean if the list is not empty? Is it OK to free the map?

Yes, list_del_init should be just list_del in this case.

These two lines are only there to remove the map from socket_mappings if
the map is part of one. Normally, map->list should NOT be empty.

Yes, kfree(map) could be in pvcalls_front_free_map, I'll make the
change.


I have just noticed that we have a socketpass_mappings in struct
pvcalls_bedata that used to be used in earlier versions of this series,
but it is now unused. Today, we just use socket_mappings for both active
and passive sockets. I'll remove it and fix pvcalls_front_remove
accordingly.


> > + spin_unlock(&bedata->socket_lock);
> > +
> > + for (i = 0; i < (1 << PVCALLS_RING_ORDER); i++)
> > + gnttab_end_foreign_access(map->active.ring->ref[i], 0, 0);
> > + gnttab_end_foreign_access(map->active.ref, 0, 0);
> > + free_page((unsigned long)map->active.ring);
> > }
> >
> > static irqreturn_t pvcalls_front_conn_handler(int irq, void *sock_map)
> > @@ -968,6 +981,91 @@ unsigned int pvcalls_front_poll(struct file *file, struct socket *sock,
> > return ret;
> > }
> >
>
>
> > +
> > + if (map->active_socket) {
> > + /*
> > + * Set in_error and wake up inflight_conn_req to force
> > + * recvmsg waiters to exit.
> > + */
> > + map->active.ring->in_error = -EBADF;
> > + wake_up_interruptible(&map->active.inflight_conn_req);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Wait until there are no more waiters on the mutexes.
> > + * We know that no new waiters can be added because sk_send_head
> > + * is set to NULL -- we only need to wait for the existing
> > + * waiters to return.
> > + */
> > + while (!mutex_trylock(&map->active.in_mutex) ||
> > + !mutex_trylock(&map->active.out_mutex))
> > + cpu_relax();
> > +
> > + pvcalls_front_free_map(bedata, map);
> > + kfree(map);
> > + } else {
> > + spin_lock(&bedata->socket_lock);
> > + if (READ_ONCE(map->passive.inflight_req_id) !=
> > + PVCALLS_INVALID_ID) {
> > + pvcalls_front_free_map(bedata,
>
> pvcalls_front_free_map will try to grab bedata->socket_lock, which we are already holding.

This is a mistake, well spotted! I'll add a boolean "locked" parameter
to pvcalls_front_free_map. If (locked), pvcalls_front_free_map won't
spin_lock.


>
> > + map->passive.accept_map);
> > + kfree(map->passive.accept_map);
> > + }
> > + list_del_init(&map->list);
>
> Again, no init?

Yes, I'll remove


> > + kfree(map);
> > + spin_unlock(&bedata->socket_lock);
> > + }
> > + WRITE_ONCE(bedata->rsp[req_id].req_id, PVCALLS_INVALID_ID);
> >
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-24 19:18    [W:0.065 / U:23.004 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site