DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matan Azrad <matan@nvidia.com>
To: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>,
	David Marchand <david.marchand@redhat.com>
Cc: dev <dev@dpdk.org>, dpdk stable <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] [PATCH] vdpa/mlx5: fix configuration mutex cleanup
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 10:45:45 +0000
Message-ID: <MW2PR12MB2492E2DF212372501834F460DFBC9@MW2PR12MB2492.namprd12.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16c7d5ef-3113-b40b-d398-8d5d19e9fd60@redhat.com>



From: Maxime Coquelin
> > From: Maxime Coquelin
> >> On 1/14/21 4:23 PM, Matan Azrad wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> From: Maxime Coquelin
> >>>> On 1/14/21 2:09 PM, Matan Azrad wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> From: Maxime Coquelin
> >>>>>> Hi Matan,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On 1/14/21 12:49 PM, Matan Azrad wrote:
> >>>>>>> Hi Maxime and David
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thank you for Review.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> From: David Marchand
> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 9:48 AM David Marchand
> >>>>>>>> <david.marchand@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> I wonder if it would be possible and cleaner to disable
> >>>>>>>>>> cancellation on the thread while the mutex is held?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Yes, we can cause thread to return by some global variable sync.
> >>>>>>> It is the same logic.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No, that was not my suggestion. My suggestion is to block the
> >>>>>> thread cancellation while in the critical section, using
> >> pthread_setcancelstate().
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yes, Generally it is better to let the thread control his
> >>>>> cancellation, either
> >>>> cancel itself or enabling\disabling cancellations.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I don't see a reason to wait for the thread in current logic - the
> >>>>> critical section
> >>>> is not important to be completed here.
> >>>>
> >>>> The reason I see is there are quite a few things done in this
> >>>> critical section. And if tomorrow someone add new things in it, he
> >>>> may not know the thread can be cancelled at any time, which could
> >>>> cause
> >> hard to debug issues.
> >>>
> >>> As I said, here it is not needed, this thread designed just to cause
> >>> guest
> >> notifications.
> >>>
> >>> The optional future developer mistake can be done also outside the
> >>> critical
> >> section in in any other place - we cannot protect it.
> >>>
> >>> The design choice is to close the thread fast.
> >>
> >> But why is it so urgent that it cannot been stopped cleanly?
> >> I don't think it would add seconds delay by doing it in a clean way.
> >
> > We have system calls there per queue.
> > No need this optional delay just because of mutex cleaning.
> 
> OK, up to you...
> 
> And what about the timer lock?

Existing code initiates it before reusing...

Thanks.

> 
> >
> >
> >> Thanks,
> >> Maxime
> >>
> >>>>> We just want to close the thread and to clean the mutex.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> +1
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> IEEE Std 1003.1-2001/Cor 2-2004, item XBD/TC2/D6/26 is applied,
> >>>>>>>> adding pthread_t to the list of types that are not required to
> >>>>>>>> be arithmetic types, thus allowing pthread_t to be defined as a
> structure.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It would be better to leave pthread_t alone and not interpret it:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> if (priv->timer_tid) {
> >>>>>>>>     pthread_cancel(priv->timer_tid);
> >>>>>>>>     pthread_join(priv->timer_tid, &status); }
> >>>>>>>> priv->timer_tid = 0;
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I'm not sure why you think it is better in this specific case.
> >>>>>>> The cancellation will close the thread in faster way, no need to
> >>>>>>> wait for the
> >>>>>> thread to close itself.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>> David Marchand
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >


  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-26 10:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-06  6:43 [dpdk-dev] " Matan Azrad
2021-01-07 18:09 ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-01-08  8:48   ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " David Marchand
2021-01-14  8:34     ` David Marchand
2021-01-14 11:49       ` Matan Azrad
2021-01-14 12:38         ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-01-14 13:09           ` Matan Azrad
2021-01-14 14:27             ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-01-14 15:23               ` Matan Azrad
2021-01-21 10:46                 ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-01-21 20:13                   ` Matan Azrad
2021-01-26 10:22                     ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-01-26 10:45                       ` Matan Azrad [this message]
2021-01-26 13:00                         ` Maxime Coquelin
2021-01-26 18:23                           ` Matan Azrad
2021-01-27 10:45 ` [dpdk-dev] " Maxime Coquelin
2021-01-27 12:01 ` 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=MW2PR12MB2492E2DF212372501834F460DFBC9@MW2PR12MB2492.namprd12.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=matan@nvidia.com \
    --cc=david.marchand@redhat.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --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

DPDK patches and discussions

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev/0 dev/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 dev dev/ https://inbox.dpdk.org/dev \
		dev@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index dev

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.dev


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git