On 12/14/18 10:51 AM, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
On 12/14/18 10:32 AM, Matthias Gatto wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018 at 7:11 PM Maxime Coquelin
<maxime.coque...@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi Matthias,
On 12/6/18 5:00 PM, Matthias Gatto wrote:
fdset_add can call fdset_shrink_nolock which call fdset_move
concurrently to poll that is call in fdset_event_dispatch.
This patch add a mutex to protect poll from been call at the same time
fdset_add call fdset_shrink_nolock.
Signed-off-by: Matthias Gatto <matthias.ga...@outscale.com>
---
lib/librte_vhost/fd_man.c | 4 ++++
lib/librte_vhost/fd_man.h | 1 +
lib/librte_vhost/socket.c | 1 +
3 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/lib/librte_vhost/fd_man.c b/lib/librte_vhost/fd_man.c
index 38347ab..55d4856 100644
--- a/lib/librte_vhost/fd_man.c
+++ b/lib/librte_vhost/fd_man.c
@@ -129,7 +129,9 @@
pthread_mutex_lock(&pfdset->fd_mutex);
i = pfdset->num < MAX_FDS ? pfdset->num++ : -1;
if (i == -1) {
+ pthread_mutex_lock(&pfdset->fd_pooling_mutex);
fdset_shrink_nolock(pfdset);
+ pthread_mutex_unlock(&pfdset->fd_pooling_mutex);
i = pfdset->num < MAX_FDS ? pfdset->num++ : -1;
if (i == -1) {
pthread_mutex_unlock(&pfdset->fd_mutex);
@@ -246,7 +248,9 @@
numfds = pfdset->num;
pthread_mutex_unlock(&pfdset->fd_mutex);
+ pthread_mutex_lock(&pfdset->fd_pooling_mutex);
val = poll(pfdset->rwfds, numfds, 1000 /* millisecs */);
+ pthread_mutex_unlock(&pfdset->fd_pooling_mutex);
Any reason we cannot use the existing fd_mutex?
yes, using the existing fd_mutex would block fdset_add during the
polling in
fdset_event_dispatch.
here fd_pooling_mutex block only fdset_shrink_nolock inside
fdset_add which happen only in very rare occasions.
Thanks for the clarification:
Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coque...@redhat.com>
I guess we need to cc: stable, can you help with specifying which
commit it fixes?
Thanks in advance,
Maxime
Maxime
