lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 02/11] Drivers: hv: vmbus: Don't bind the offer&rescind works to a specific CPU
On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 03:16:21PM +0100, Vitaly Kuznetsov wrote:
> "Andrea Parri (Microsoft)" <parri.andrea@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > The offer and rescind works are currently scheduled on the so called
> > "connect CPU". However, this is not really needed: we can synchronize
> > the works by relying on the usage of the offer_in_progress counter and
> > of the channel_mutex mutex. This synchronization is already in place.
> > So, remove this unnecessary "bind to the connect CPU" constraint and
> > update the inline comments accordingly.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrea Parri (Microsoft) <parri.andrea@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/hv/channel_mgmt.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
> > drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> > 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/hv/channel_mgmt.c b/drivers/hv/channel_mgmt.c
> > index 0370364169c4e..1191f3d76d111 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hv/channel_mgmt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/hv/channel_mgmt.c
> > @@ -1025,11 +1025,22 @@ static void vmbus_onoffer_rescind(struct vmbus_channel_message_header *hdr)
> > * offer comes in first and then the rescind.
> > * Since we process these events in work elements,
> > * and with preemption, we may end up processing
> > - * the events out of order. Given that we handle these
> > - * work elements on the same CPU, this is possible only
> > - * in the case of preemption. In any case wait here
> > - * until the offer processing has moved beyond the
> > - * point where the channel is discoverable.
> > + * the events out of order. We rely on the synchronization
> > + * provided by offer_in_progress and by channel_mutex for
> > + * ordering these events:
> > + *
> > + * { Initially: offer_in_progress = 1 }
> > + *
> > + * CPU1 CPU2
> > + *
> > + * [vmbus_process_offer()] [vmbus_onoffer_rescind()]
> > + *
> > + * LOCK channel_mutex WAIT_ON offer_in_progress == 0
> > + * DECREMENT offer_in_progress LOCK channel_mutex
> > + * INSERT chn_list SEARCH chn_list
> > + * UNLOCK channel_mutex UNLOCK channel_mutex
> > + *
> > + * Forbids: CPU2's SEARCH from *not* seeing CPU1's INSERT
>
> WAIT_ON offer_in_progress == 0
> LOCK channel_mutex
>
> seems to be racy: what happens if offer_in_progress increments after we
> read it but before we managed to aquire channel_mutex?

Remark that the RESCIND work must see the increment which is performed
"before" queueing the work in question (and the associated OFFER work),
cf. the comment in vmbus_on_msg_dpc() below and

dbb92f88648d6 ("workqueue: Document (some) memory-ordering properties of {queue,schedule}_work()")

AFAICT, this suffices to meet the intended behavior as sketched above.
I might be missing something of course, can you elaborate on the issue
here?

Thanks,
Andrea


>
> I think this shold be changed to
>
> LOCK channel_mutex
> CHECK offer_in_progress == 0
> EQUAL? GOTO proceed with rescind handling
> NOT EQUAL?
> WHILE offer_in_progress) != 0 {
> UNLOCK channel_mutex
> MSLEEP(1)
> LOCK channel_mutex
> }
> proceed with rescind handling:
> ...
> UNLOCK channel_mutex
>
> > */
> >
> > while (atomic_read(&vmbus_connection.offer_in_progress) != 0) {
> > diff --git a/drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c b/drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c
> > index 7600615e13754..903b1ec6a259e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c
> > +++ b/drivers/hv/vmbus_drv.c
> > @@ -1048,8 +1048,9 @@ void vmbus_on_msg_dpc(unsigned long data)
> > /*
> > * The host can generate a rescind message while we
> > * may still be handling the original offer. We deal with
> > - * this condition by ensuring the processing is done on the
> > - * same CPU.
> > + * this condition by relying on the synchronization provided
> > + * by offer_in_progress and by channel_mutex. See also the
> > + * inline comments in vmbus_onoffer_rescind().
> > */
> > switch (hdr->msgtype) {
> > case CHANNELMSG_RESCIND_CHANNELOFFER:
> > @@ -1071,16 +1072,34 @@ void vmbus_on_msg_dpc(unsigned long data)
> > * work queue: the RESCIND handler can not start to
> > * run before the OFFER handler finishes.
> > */
> > - schedule_work_on(VMBUS_CONNECT_CPU,
> > - &ctx->work);
> > + schedule_work(&ctx->work);
> > break;
> >
> > case CHANNELMSG_OFFERCHANNEL:
> > + /*
> > + * The host sends the offer message of a given channel
> > + * before sending the rescind message of the same
> > + * channel. These messages are sent to the guest's
> > + * connect CPU; the guest then starts processing them
> > + * in the tasklet handler on this CPU:
> > + *
> > + * VMBUS_CONNECT_CPU
> > + *
> > + * [vmbus_on_msg_dpc()]
> > + * atomic_inc() // CHANNELMSG_OFFERCHANNEL
> > + * queue_work()
> > + * ...
> > + * [vmbus_on_msg_dpc()]
> > + * schedule_work() // CHANNELMSG_RESCIND_CHANNELOFFER
> > + *
> > + * We rely on the memory-ordering properties of the
> > + * queue_work() and schedule_work() primitives, which
> > + * guarantee that the atomic increment will be visible
> > + * to the CPUs which will execute the offer & rescind
> > + * works by the time these works will start execution.
> > + */
> > atomic_inc(&vmbus_connection.offer_in_progress);
> > - queue_work_on(VMBUS_CONNECT_CPU,
> > - vmbus_connection.work_queue,
> > - &ctx->work);
> > - break;
> > + fallthrough;
> >
> > default:
> > queue_work(vmbus_connection.work_queue, &ctx->work);
> > @@ -1124,9 +1143,7 @@ static void vmbus_force_channel_rescinded(struct vmbus_channel *channel)
> >
> > INIT_WORK(&ctx->work, vmbus_onmessage_work);
> >
> > - queue_work_on(VMBUS_CONNECT_CPU,
> > - vmbus_connection.work_queue,
> > - &ctx->work);
> > + queue_work(vmbus_connection.work_queue, &ctx->work);
> > }
> > #endif /* CONFIG_PM_SLEEP */
>
> --
> Vitaly
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-26 16:48    [W:0.093 / U:1.360 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site