[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH 2/6] libvhost-user: Use slave_mutex in all slave messages
From: |
Greg Kurz |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH 2/6] libvhost-user: Use slave_mutex in all slave messages |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Jan 2021 15:31:23 +0100 |
On Mon, 25 Jan 2021 13:01:11 -0500
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> wrote:
> dev->slave_mutex needs to be taken when sending messages on slave_fd.
> Currently _vu_queue_notify() does not do that.
>
> Introduce a helper vu_message_slave_send_receive() which sends as well
> as receive response. Use this helper in all the paths which send
> message on slave_fd channel.
>
Does this fix any known bug ?
> Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
> ---
LGTM
Reviewed-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
> subprojects/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c | 50 ++++++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/subprojects/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c
> b/subprojects/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c
> index 4cf4aef63d..7a56c56dc8 100644
> --- a/subprojects/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c
> +++ b/subprojects/libvhost-user/libvhost-user.c
> @@ -403,7 +403,7 @@ vu_send_reply(VuDev *dev, int conn_fd, VhostUserMsg *vmsg)
> * Processes a reply on the slave channel.
> * Entered with slave_mutex held and releases it before exit.
> * Returns true on success.
> - * *payload is written on success
> + * *payload is written on success, if payload is not NULL.
> */
> static bool
> vu_process_message_reply(VuDev *dev, const VhostUserMsg *vmsg,
> @@ -427,7 +427,9 @@ vu_process_message_reply(VuDev *dev, const VhostUserMsg
> *vmsg,
> goto out;
> }
>
> - *payload = msg_reply.payload.u64;
> + if (payload) {
> + *payload = msg_reply.payload.u64;
> + }
> result = true;
>
> out:
> @@ -435,6 +437,25 @@ out:
> return result;
> }
>
> +/* Returns true on success, false otherwise */
> +static bool
> +vu_message_slave_send_receive(VuDev *dev, VhostUserMsg *vmsg, uint64_t
> *payload)
> +{
> + pthread_mutex_lock(&dev->slave_mutex);
> + if (!vu_message_write(dev, dev->slave_fd, vmsg)) {
> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&dev->slave_mutex);
> + return false;
> + }
> +
> + if ((vmsg->flags & VHOST_USER_NEED_REPLY_MASK) == 0) {
> + pthread_mutex_unlock(&dev->slave_mutex);
> + return true;
> + }
> +
> + /* Also unlocks the slave_mutex */
> + return vu_process_message_reply(dev, vmsg, payload);
> +}
> +
> /* Kick the log_call_fd if required. */
> static void
> vu_log_kick(VuDev *dev)
> @@ -1340,16 +1361,8 @@ bool vu_set_queue_host_notifier(VuDev *dev, VuVirtq
> *vq, int fd,
> return false;
> }
>
> - pthread_mutex_lock(&dev->slave_mutex);
> - if (!vu_message_write(dev, dev->slave_fd, &vmsg)) {
> - pthread_mutex_unlock(&dev->slave_mutex);
> - return false;
> - }
> -
> - /* Also unlocks the slave_mutex */
> - res = vu_process_message_reply(dev, &vmsg, &payload);
> + res = vu_message_slave_send_receive(dev, &vmsg, &payload);
> res = res && (payload == 0);
> -
> return res;
> }
>
> @@ -2395,10 +2408,7 @@ static void _vu_queue_notify(VuDev *dev, VuVirtq *vq,
> bool sync)
> vmsg.flags |= VHOST_USER_NEED_REPLY_MASK;
> }
>
> - vu_message_write(dev, dev->slave_fd, &vmsg);
> - if (ack) {
> - vu_message_read_default(dev, dev->slave_fd, &vmsg);
> - }
> + vu_message_slave_send_receive(dev, &vmsg, NULL);
> return;
> }
>
> @@ -2942,17 +2952,11 @@ int64_t vu_fs_cache_request(VuDev *dev,
> VhostUserSlaveRequest req, int fd,
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - pthread_mutex_lock(&dev->slave_mutex);
> - if (!vu_message_write(dev, dev->slave_fd, &vmsg)) {
> - pthread_mutex_unlock(&dev->slave_mutex);
> - return -EIO;
> - }
> -
> - /* Also unlocks the slave_mutex */
> - res = vu_process_message_reply(dev, &vmsg, &payload);
> + res = vu_message_slave_send_receive(dev, &vmsg, &payload);
> if (!res) {
> return -EIO;
> }
> +
> /*
> * Payload is delivered as uint64_t but is actually signed for
> * errors.