From: David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
To: Eelco Chaudron <echaudro@redhat.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org, stable@dpdk.org,
Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>,
Chenbo Xia <chenbox@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] vhost: fix virtqueue access lock in datapath
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 11:22:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJFAV8x73jQ-0Rvpo3zcNyDhgQLv6t2xuLZzeV1EkmqQJRxMgA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <76029D4A-DA8B-4CE9-ACFC-0B7D5BFF8512@redhat.com>
On Fri, Oct 27, 2023 at 11:05 AM Eelco Chaudron <echaudro@redhat.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/lib/vhost/virtio_net.c b/lib/vhost/virtio_net.c
> > index 759a78e3e3..4116f79d4f 100644
> > --- a/lib/vhost/virtio_net.c
> > +++ b/lib/vhost/virtio_net.c
> > @@ -1694,6 +1694,17 @@ virtio_dev_rx_packed(struct virtio_net *dev,
> > return pkt_idx;
> > }
> >
> > +static void
> > +virtio_dev_vring_translate(struct virtio_net *dev, struct vhost_virtqueue *vq)
> > +{
>
> Would it be an idea to annotate this function that it needs to be called with the “read locks” (and that it will free them) to avoid the duplicate:
>
> + vhost_user_iotlb_rd_unlock(vq);
> + rte_rwlock_read_unlock(&vq->access_lock);
The "unlock" annotations do not express read/write concerns for locks.
So that would make the code less readable and potentially hide some issues.
I prefer to keep as is, with clear calls to rd_lock / rd_unlock in
those functions.
>
> > + rte_rwlock_write_lock(&vq->access_lock);
> > + vhost_user_iotlb_rd_lock(vq);
> > + if (!vq->access_ok)
> > + vring_translate(dev, vq);
> > + vhost_user_iotlb_rd_unlock(vq);
> > + rte_rwlock_write_unlock(&vq->access_lock);
> > +}
> > +
--
David Marchand
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-27 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20231023095520.2864868-1-david.marchand@redhat.com>
2023-10-23 9:55 ` David Marchand
2023-10-27 9:03 ` Eelco Chaudron
2023-10-27 9:22 ` David Marchand [this message]
2023-10-27 10:11 ` Eelco Chaudron
2023-12-05 9:10 ` Maxime Coquelin
2023-12-05 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] vhost: fix virtqueue access check " David Marchand
2023-12-05 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 2/5] vhost: fix virtqueue access check in VDUSE setup David Marchand
2023-12-05 9:57 ` Maxime Coquelin
2023-12-05 9:45 ` [PATCH v2 3/5] vhost: fix virtqueue access check in vhost-user setup David Marchand
2023-12-05 9:59 ` Maxime Coquelin
2023-12-12 11:37 ` [PATCH v2 1/5] vhost: fix virtqueue access check in datapath Maxime Coquelin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAJFAV8x73jQ-0Rvpo3zcNyDhgQLv6t2xuLZzeV1EkmqQJRxMgA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=david.marchand@redhat.com \
--cc=chenbox@nvidia.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=echaudro@redhat.com \
--cc=maxime.coquelin@redhat.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).