Il 13/06/2013 11:03, Liu Ping Fan ha scritto:
> From: Liu Ping Fan <pingf...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
>
> Nested call caused by ->receive() will raise issue like deadlock,
> so postphone it to BH.
When I read this patch, I am completely puzzled.
All I see is that a qemu_net_queue_flush is done in a bottom half. I
have no clue of how you get a nested call of ->receive, and I have no
clue of what this patch does to prevent it (since the bottom half is
asynchronous).
A bottom half is not a synchronization primitive. If you use a lock, or
a condition variable, or RCU, you can usually assume that the reader
understands how you're using it (though not if you're doing fancy
tricks). If you are introducing infrastructure, you can use long
comments or docs/ and expect the reviewer to read those.
But if you're doing tricky stuff (such as if you have global/local
locks, or you have parts of the code that run lockless, or if you are
modifying the behavior of an existing subsystem to prevent deadlocks),
you need to document _every single step that you do_.
For example, let's take the patches you had for hostmem.c. You had a
single patch doing all the work:
hostmem: make hostmem global and RAM hotunplg safe
The hostmem listener will translate gpa to hva quickly. Make it
global, so other component can use it.
Also this patch adopt MemoryRegionOps's ref/unref interface to
make it survive the RAM hotunplug.
No reference whatsoever to the reference counting of the hostmem itself,
and how you are using the locks. The "also" in the commit message is a
big warning sign, too (though I'm guilty of adding many "also"s in the
commit messages).
When I took your ideas and applied them to memory.c, here is how I
explained it:
memory: use a new FlatView pointer on every topology update
This is the first step towards converting as->current_map to
RCU-style updates, where the FlatView updates run concurrently
with uses of an old FlatView.
---
memory: add reference counting to FlatView
With this change, a FlatView can be used even after a concurrent
update has replaced it. Because we do not have RCU, we use a
mutex to protect the small critical sections that read/write the
as->current_map pointer. Accesses to the FlatView can be done
outside the mutex.
And in the code:
/* flat_view_mutex is taken around reading as->current_map; the
* critical section is extremely short, so I'm using a single mutex
* for every AS. We could also RCU for the read-side.
*
* The BQL is taken around transaction commits, hence both locks are
* taken while writing to as->current_map (with the BQL taken
* outside).
*/
It is still quite concise, but it explains both the concurrency to
expect, and the locking policies.
This patch is changing the behavior of existing code in a complex
scenario and in a tricky way. If you want your patches accepted (or
even reviewed), you _must_ learn how to explain the scenarios and your
fixes.
And believe me, it is not a language problem; people with much worse
English than yours manage this all the time. It is more of an attitude
problem, and I've explained it many times.
Paolo
> Signed-off-by: Liu Ping Fan <pingf...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> net/queue.c | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 38 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/queue.c b/net/queue.c
> index 58222b0..9c343ab 100644
> --- a/net/queue.c
> +++ b/net/queue.c
> @@ -24,6 +24,8 @@
> #include "net/queue.h"
> #include "qemu/queue.h"
> #include "net/net.h"
> +#include "block/aio.h"
> +#include "qemu/main-loop.h"
>
> /* The delivery handler may only return zero if it will call
> * qemu_net_queue_flush() when it determines that it is once again able
> @@ -183,6 +185,22 @@ static ssize_t qemu_net_queue_deliver_iov(NetQueue
> *queue,
> return ret;
> }
>
> +typedef struct NetQueBH {
> + QEMUBH *bh;
> + NetClientState *nc;
> +} NetQueBH;
> +
> +static void qemu_net_queue_send_bh(void *opaque)
> +{
> + NetQueBH *q_bh = opaque;
> + NetQueue *queue = q_bh->nc->send_queue;
> +
> + qemu_net_queue_flush(queue);
> + netclient_unref(q_bh->nc);
> + qemu_bh_delete(q_bh->bh);
> + g_slice_free(NetQueBH, q_bh);
> +}
> +
> ssize_t qemu_net_queue_send(NetQueue *queue,
> NetClientState *sender,
> unsigned flags,
> @@ -192,8 +210,17 @@ ssize_t qemu_net_queue_send(NetQueue *queue,
> {
> ssize_t ret;
>
> - if (queue->delivering || !qemu_can_send_packet_nolock(sender)) {
> + if (queue->delivering || !qemu_can_send_packet_nolock(sender)
> + || sender->send_queue->delivering) {
> qemu_net_queue_append(queue, sender, flags, data, size, sent_cb);
> + /* Nested call will be deferred to BH */
> + if (sender->send_queue->delivering) {
> + NetQueBH *que_bh = g_slice_new(NetQueBH);
> + que_bh->bh = qemu_bh_new(qemu_net_queue_send_bh, que_bh);
> + que_bh->nc = queue->opaque;
> + netclient_ref(queue->opaque);
> + qemu_bh_schedule(que_bh->bh);
> + }
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -217,8 +244,17 @@ ssize_t qemu_net_queue_send_iov(NetQueue *queue,
> {
> ssize_t ret;
>
> - if (queue->delivering || !qemu_can_send_packet_nolock(sender)) {
> + if (queue->delivering || !qemu_can_send_packet_nolock(sender)
> + || sender->send_queue->delivering) {
> qemu_net_queue_append_iov(queue, sender, flags, iov, iovcnt,
> sent_cb);
> + /* Nested call will be deferred to BH */
> + if (sender->send_queue->delivering) {
> + NetQueBH *que_bh = g_slice_new(NetQueBH);
> + que_bh->bh = qemu_bh_new(qemu_net_queue_send_bh, que_bh);
> + que_bh->nc = queue->opaque;
> + netclient_ref(queue->opaque);
> + qemu_bh_schedule(que_bh->bh);
> + }
> return 0;
> }
>
>
