lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [[PATCH v1] 21/37] [CIFS] SMBD: Implement API for upper layer to receive data
Date


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Talpey
> Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 1:57 PM
> To: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>; Steve French <sfrench@samba.org>;
> linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org; samba-technical@lists.samba.org; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [[PATCH v1] 21/37] [CIFS] SMBD: Implement API for upper layer
> to receive data
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-cifs-owner@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-cifs-
> > owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Long Li
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 4:11 PM
> > To: Steve French <sfrench@samba.org>; linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org;
> > samba- technical@lists.samba.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: Long Li <longli@microsoft.com>
> > Subject: [[PATCH v1] 21/37] [CIFS] SMBD: Implement API for upper layer
> > to receive data
> >
> > /*
> > + * Read data from receive reassembly queue
> > + * All the incoming data packets are placed in reassembly queue
> > + * buf: the buffer to read data into
> > + * size: the length of data to read
> > + * return value: actual data read
> > + */
> > +int cifs_rdma_read(struct cifs_rdma_info *info, char *buf, unsigned
> > +int size) {
> >...
> > + spin_lock_irqsave(&info->reassembly_queue_lock, flags);
> > + log_cifs_read("size=%d info->reassembly_data_length=%d\n", size,
> > + atomic_read(&info->reassembly_data_length));
> > + if (atomic_read(&info->reassembly_data_length) >= size) {
>
> If the reassembly queue is protected by a lock, why is an atomic_read() of its
> length needed?

Will change this to non-atomic.

>
> > + // this is for reading rfc1002 length
> > + if (response->first_segment && size==4) {
> > + unsigned int rfc1002_len =
> > + data_length + remaining_data_length;
> > + *((__be32*)buf) = cpu_to_be32(rfc1002_len);
> > + data_read = 4;
> > + response->first_segment = false;
> > + log_cifs_read("returning rfc1002 length %d\n",
> > + rfc1002_len);
> > + goto read_rfc1002_done;
> > + }
>
> I am totally confused. What does RFC1002 framing have to do with receiving
> an SMB Direct packet???

The upper layer expects RFC1002 length at the beginning of the payload. A lot of protocol processing logic check and act on this value. Returning this value will avoid changes to lots of other upper layer code.

This will be eventually fixed when a transport layer is added to upper layer code. I recommend we do it in another patch.

>
> > +
> > + to_copy = min_t(int, data_length - offset, to_read);
> > + memcpy(
> > + buf + data_read,
> > + (char*)data_transfer + data_offset + offset,
> > + to_copy);
>
> Is it really necessary to perform all these data copies, especially under the
> reassembly_queue spinlock? This seems quite inefficient. Can the receive
> buffers not be loaned out and chained logically?

This will require upper layer code changes to move to use new buffers allocated/loaned this way, and also deal with packet boundaries.

This code is not used to actually carry file data, which are normally done through RDMA read/write.

If we want to do it, I suggest do another patch since more changes other than transport are involved.

>
> Tom.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-15 01:25    [W:0.082 / U:2.972 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site