lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC 1/4] vsock/virtio: reduce credit update messages
On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 08:15:39PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 04, 2019 at 12:58:35PM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > @@ -256,6 +257,7 @@ virtio_transport_stream_do_dequeue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
> > struct virtio_vsock_sock *vvs = vsk->trans;
> > struct virtio_vsock_pkt *pkt;
> > size_t bytes, total = 0;
> > + s64 free_space;
>
> Why s64? buf_alloc, fwd_cnt, and last_fwd_cnt are all u32. fwd_cnt -
> last_fwd_cnt <= buf_alloc is always true.
>

Right, I'll use a u32 for free_space!
Is is a leftover because initially I implemented something like
virtio_transport_has_space().

> > int err = -EFAULT;
> >
> > spin_lock_bh(&vvs->rx_lock);
> > @@ -288,9 +290,15 @@ virtio_transport_stream_do_dequeue(struct vsock_sock *vsk,
> > }
> > spin_unlock_bh(&vvs->rx_lock);
> >
> > - /* Send a credit pkt to peer */
> > - virtio_transport_send_credit_update(vsk, VIRTIO_VSOCK_TYPE_STREAM,
> > - NULL);
> > + /* We send a credit update only when the space available seen
> > + * by the transmitter is less than VIRTIO_VSOCK_MAX_PKT_BUF_SIZE
> > + */
> > + free_space = vvs->buf_alloc - (vvs->fwd_cnt - vvs->last_fwd_cnt);
>
> Locking? These fields should be accessed under tx_lock.
>

Yes, we need a lock, but looking in the code, vvs->fwd_cnd is written
taking rx_lock (virtio_transport_dec_rx_pkt) and it is read with the
tx_lock (virtio_transport_inc_tx_pkt).

Maybe we should use another spin_lock shared between RX and TX for those
fields or use atomic variables.

What do you suggest?

Thanks,
Stefano

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-05 10:17    [W:0.071 / U:1.680 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site