On (Tue) 09 Sep 2014 [23:23:07], Amos Kong wrote:
> (Resend to fix the subject)
>
> Hi Amit, Rusty
>
> RHBZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127062
> steps:
> - Read random data by 'dd if=/dev/hwrng of=/dev/null' in guest
> - check sysfs files in the same time, 'cat /sys/class/misc/hw_random/rng_*'
>
> Result: cat process will get stuck, it will return if we kill dd process.
How common is it going to be to have a long-running 'dd' process on
/dev/hwrng?
Also, with the new khwrng thread, reading from /dev/hwrng isn't
required -- just use /dev/random?
(This doesn't mean we shouldn't fix the issue here...)
> We have some static variables (eg, current_rng, data_avail, etc) in
> hw_random/core.c,
> they are protected by rng_mutex. I try to workaround this issue by
> undelay(100)
> after mutex_unlock() in rng_dev_read(). This gives chance for
> hwrng_attr_*_show()
> to get mutex.
>
> This patch also contains some cleanup, moving some code out of mutex
> protection.
>
> Do you have some suggestion? Thanks.
>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c b/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c
> index aa30a25..fa69020 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c
> @@ -194,6 +194,7 @@ static ssize_t rng_dev_read(struct file *filp, char
> __user *buf,
> }
>
> mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex);
> + udelay(100);
We have a need_resched() right below. Why doesn't that work?
> if (need_resched())
> schedule_timeout_interruptible(1);
> @@ -233,10 +234,10 @@ static ssize_t hwrng_attr_current_store(struct device
> *dev,
> int err;
> struct hwrng *rng;
The following hunk doesn't work:
> + err = -ENODEV;
> err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&rng_mutex);
err is being set to another value in the next line!
> if (err)
> return -ERESTARTSYS;
> - err = -ENODEV;
And all usage of err below now won't have -ENODEV but some other value.
> list_for_each_entry(rng, &rng_list, list) {
> if (strcmp(rng->name, buf) == 0) {
> if (rng == current_rng) {
> @@ -270,8 +271,8 @@ static ssize_t hwrng_attr_current_show(struct device *dev,
> return -ERESTARTSYS;
> if (current_rng)
> name = current_rng->name;
> - ret = snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%s\n", name);
> mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex);
> + ret = snprintf(buf, PAGE_SIZE, "%s\n", name);
This looks OK...
>
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -284,19 +285,19 @@ static ssize_t hwrng_attr_available_show(struct device
> *dev,
> ssize_t ret = 0;
> struct hwrng *rng;
>
> + buf[0] = '\0';
> err = mutex_lock_interruptible(&rng_mutex);
> if (err)
> return -ERESTARTSYS;
>
> - buf[0] = '\0';
> list_for_each_entry(rng, &rng_list, list) {
> strncat(buf, rng->name, PAGE_SIZE - ret - 1);
> ret += strlen(rng->name);
> strncat(buf, " ", PAGE_SIZE - ret - 1);
> ret++;
> }
> + mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex);
> strncat(buf, "\n", PAGE_SIZE - ret - 1);
> ret++;
> - mutex_unlock(&rng_mutex);
But this isn't resulting in savings; the majority of the time is being
spent in the for loop, and that writes to the buffer.
BTW I don't expect strcat'ing to the buf in each of these scenarios is
a long operation, so this reworking doesn't strike to me as something
we should pursue.
Amit
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
