On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 01:20:32PM +0800, Junnan Wu wrote:
From: Ying Gao <ying01....@samsung.com>
In function virtio_vsock_probe, it initializes the variables
"rx_buf_nr" and "rx_buf_max_nr",
but in function virtio_vsock_restore it doesn't.
Move the initizalition position into function virtio_vsock_vqs_start.
Once executing s2r twice in a row without
s2r ? suspend 2 ram?
Please define the acronym, it was hard for me to understand (the code
helped me).
initializing rx_buf_nr and rx_buf_max_nr,
the rx_buf_max_nr increased to three times vq->num_free,
at this time, in function virtio_transport_rx_work,
the conditions to fill rx buffer
(rx_buf_nr < rx_buf_max_nr / 2) can't be met.
Please add a Fixes tag, in this case I think it should be:
Fixes: bd50c5dc182b ("vsock/virtio: add support for device suspend/resume")
but please, double check.
Signed-off-by: Ying Gao <ying01....@samsung.com>
Signed-off-by: Junnan Wu <junnan01...@samsung.com>
---
net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
I find the commit title/description a bit hard to understand, please
take a look at:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#describe-your-changes
In this case I'd write something like this:
vsock/virtio: initialize rx_buf_nr and rx_buf_max_nr when resuming
[Describe the symptom]
When executing suspend/resume twice in a row, ...
[Describe the issue]
`rx_buf_nr` and `rx_buf_max_nr` are initialized only in
virtio_vsock_probe(), but they should be reset whenever virtqueues
are recreated, like after a suspend/resume. ...
[Desribe the fix, what this patch does]
Move the `rx_buf_nr` and `rx_buf_max_nr` initialization in
virtio_vsock_vqs_init(), so we are sure that they are properly
initialized, every time we initialize the virtqueues, either when we
load the driver or after a suspend/resume. ...
diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
index b58c3818f284..9eefd0fba92b 100644
--- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
+++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c
@@ -688,6 +688,8 @@ static void virtio_vsock_vqs_start(struct virtio_vsock
*vsock)
I think it is better to move the initialization of those fields in
virtio_vsock_vqs_init().
mutex_unlock(&vsock->tx_lock);
mutex_lock(&vsock->rx_lock);
+ vsock->rx_buf_nr = 0;
+ vsock->rx_buf_max_nr = 0;
virtio_vsock_rx_fill(vsock);
vsock->rx_run = true;
mutex_unlock(&vsock->rx_lock);
@@ -779,8 +781,6 @@ static int virtio_vsock_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
vsock->vdev = vdev;
- vsock->rx_buf_nr = 0;
- vsock->rx_buf_max_nr = 0;
atomic_set(&vsock->queued_replies, 0);
Should we also move `queued_replies` ?
Thanks,
Stefano
mutex_init(&vsock->tx_lock);
--
2.34.1
