LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com>
To: Vitaly Kuznetsov <vkuznets@redhat.com>
Cc: "devel@linuxdriverproject.org" <devel@linuxdriverproject.org>,
	"Haiyang Zhang" <haiyangz@microsoft.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dexuan Cui <decui@microsoft.com>,
	Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/4] Drivers: hv: Further protection for the rescind path
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 15:52:53 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <BY2PR0301MB0711E4251C6567606ACDC20DA03B0@BY2PR0301MB0711.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r3u4r7nd.fsf@vitty.brq.redhat.com>



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vitaly Kuznetsov [mailto:vkuznets@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 5, 2015 2:10 AM
> To: KY Srinivasan
> Cc: devel@linuxdriverproject.org; Haiyang Zhang; linux-
> kernel@vger.kernel.org; Dexuan Cui; Jason Wang
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Drivers: hv: Further protection for the rescind path
> 
> KY Srinivasan <kys@microsoft.com> writes:
> 
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Vitaly Kuznetsov [mailto:vkuznets@redhat.com]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 9:01 AM
> >> To: KY Srinivasan; devel@linuxdriverproject.org
> >> Cc: Haiyang Zhang; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Dexuan Cui; Jason
> >> Wang
> >> Subject: [PATCH 0/4] Drivers: hv: Further protection for the rescind
> >> path
> >>
> >> This series is a continuation of the "Drivers: hv: vmbus: serialize
> >> Offer and Rescind offer". I'm trying to address a number of
> >> theoretically possible issues with rescind offer handling. All these
> >> complications come from the fact that a rescind offer results in
> >> vmbus channel being freed and we must ensure nobody still uses it.
> >> Instead of introducing new locks I suggest we switch channels usage to
> the get/put workflow.
> >>
> >> The main part of the series is [PATCH 1/4] which introduces the
> >> workflow for vmbus channels, all other patches fix different corner
> >> cases using this workflow. I'm not sure all such cases are covered
> >> with this series (probably not), but in case protection is required
> >> in some other places it should become relatively easy to add one.
> >>
> >> I did some sanity testing with CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP=y and nothing
> >> popped out, however, additional testing would be much appreciated.
> >>
> >> K.Y., Haiyang, I'm not sending this series to netdev@ and linux-scsi@
> >> as it is supposed to be applied as a whole, please resend these
> >> patches with your sign-offs when (and if) we're done with reviews.
> Thanks!
> >
> > Vitaly,
> >
> > Thanks for looking into this issue. While today, rescind offer results
> > in the freeing of the channel, I don't think that is required. By not
> > freeing up the channel in the rescind path, we can have a safe way to
> > access the channel and that does not have to involve taking a
> > reference on the channel every time you access it - the get/put
> > workflow in your patch set. As part of the network performance
> > improvement work, I had eliminated all locks in the receive path by setting
> up per-cpu data structures for mapping the relid to channel etc. These set of
> patches introduces locking/atomic operations in performance critical code
> paths to deal with an event that is truly rare - the channel getting rescinded.
> 
> It is possible to eliminate all locks/atomic operations from performance
> critical pyth in my patch series by following Dexuan's suggestion - we'll get
> the channel in vmbus_open and put it in vmbus_close (and on processing
> offer/rescind offer) this won't affect performance. I'm in the middle of
> testing this approach.
> 
> >
> > All channel messages are handled in a single work context:
> >
> > vmbus_on_msg_dpc() -> vmbus_onmessage_work()-> Various channel
> > messages [offer, rescind etc.]
> >
> > So, the rescind message cannot be processed while we are processing
> > the offer message and since an offer cannot be rescinded before it is
> > offered, offer and rescind are naturally serialized (I think I have
> > patchset in my queue from you that is trying to solve the concurrent
> execution of offer and rescind and looking at the code I cannot see how this
> can occur).
> >
> > As part of handling the rescind message, we will just set the channel
> > state to indicate that the offer is rescinded (we can add the rescind state to
> the channel states already defined and this will be done under the protection
> of the channel lock).
> > The cleanup of the channel and sending of the RELID release message
> > will only be done in the context of the driver as part of driver
> > remove function. I think this should be doable in a way that does not
> penalize the normal path. If it is ok with you, I will try to put together a patch
> along the lines I have described here.
> >
> 
> Yes, if we consider rescind event as a very rare event we can avoid freeing
> channels, but if (in some conditions) it happens frequently we'll have
> significant memory leakage.
> 
Rescind offer is rare; but I am not suggesting that we would leak memory in this case.
What I am suggesting is that we can place the burden where it should be - do all
the cleanup in vmbus_close() driven by the remove function.

K. Y

      parent reply	other threads:[~2015-02-05 15:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-03 17:00 Vitaly Kuznetsov
2015-02-03 17:00 ` [PATCH 1/4] Drivers: hv: vmbus: implement get/put usage workflow for vmbus channels Vitaly Kuznetsov
2015-02-04  8:18   ` Dexuan Cui
2015-02-04  9:32     ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2015-02-04  9:54       ` Dexuan Cui
2015-02-04  9:14   ` Jason Wang
2015-02-04  9:33     ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2015-02-03 17:00 ` [PATCH 2/4] Drivers: hv: vmbus: do not lose rescind offer on failure in vmbus_process_offer() Vitaly Kuznetsov
2015-02-04  7:42   ` Dexuan Cui
2015-02-03 17:00 ` [PATCH 3/4] Drivers: hv: vmbus: protect vmbus_get_outgoing_channel() against channel removal Vitaly Kuznetsov
2015-02-04  7:27   ` Dexuan Cui
2015-02-03 17:00 ` [PATCH 4/4] hyperv: netvsc: improve protection against rescind offer Vitaly Kuznetsov
2015-02-04  7:29   ` Dexuan Cui
2015-02-04 18:26 ` [PATCH 0/4] Drivers: hv: Further protection for the rescind path KY Srinivasan
2015-02-05 10:10   ` Vitaly Kuznetsov
2015-02-05 12:44     ` Dexuan Cui
2015-02-05 22:47       ` KY Srinivasan
2015-02-06 14:53         ` Dexuan Cui
2015-02-07 16:27           ` KY Srinivasan
2015-02-05 15:52     ` KY Srinivasan [this message]

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=BY2PR0301MB0711E4251C6567606ACDC20DA03B0@BY2PR0301MB0711.namprd03.prod.outlook.com \
    --to=kys@microsoft.com \
    --cc=decui@microsoft.com \
    --cc=devel@linuxdriverproject.org \
    --cc=haiyangz@microsoft.com \
    --cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=vkuznets@redhat.com \
    --subject='RE: [PATCH 0/4] Drivers: hv: Further protection for the rescind path' \
    /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

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).