On 14/03/17 22:22, Stefano Stabellini wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > thank you for the review! > > On Tue, 14 Mar 2017, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 14/03/17 00:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote: >>> Implement functions to handle the xenbus handshake. Upon connection, >>> allocate the rings according to the protocol specification. >>> >>> Initialize a work_struct and a wait_queue. The work_struct will be used >>> to schedule work upon receiving an event channel notification from the >>> backend. The wait_queue will be used to wait when the ring is full and >>> we need to send a new request. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Stefano Stabellini <stef...@aporeto.com> >>> CC: boris.ostrov...@oracle.com >>> CC: jgr...@suse.com >>> CC: Eric Van Hensbergen <eri...@gmail.com> >>> CC: Ron Minnich <rminn...@sandia.gov> >>> CC: Latchesar Ionkov <lu...@ionkov.net> >>> CC: v9fs-develo...@lists.sourceforge.net >>> ---
>> Did you think about using request_threaded_irq() instead of a workqueue? >> For an example see e.g. drivers/scsi/xen-scsifront.c > > I like workqueues :-) It might come down to personal preferences, but I > think workqueues are more flexible and a better fit for this use case. > Not only it is easy to schedule work in a workqueue from the interrupt > handler, but also they can be used for sleeping in the request function > if there is not enough room on the ring. Besides, they can easily be > configured to share a single thread or to have multiple independent > threads. I'm fine with the workqueues as long as you have decided to use them considering the alternatives. :-) >> Can't you use xenbus_read_unsigned() instead of xenbus_read()? > > I can use xenbus_read_unsigned in the other cases below, but not here, > because versions is in the form: "1,3,4" Is this documented somewhere? Hmm, are any of the Xenstore entries documented? Shouldn't this be done in xen_9pfs.h ? Juergen _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xen.org https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
