Re: [PATCH v4 08/13] xen/pvcalls: implement accept command

From: Boris Ostrovsky
Date: Thu Sep 21 2017 - 20:00:54 EST



+int pvcalls_front_accept(struct socket *sock, struct socket *newsock, int flags)
+{
+ struct pvcalls_bedata *bedata;
+ struct sock_mapping *map;
+ struct sock_mapping *map2 = NULL;
+ struct xen_pvcalls_request *req;
+ int notify, req_id, ret, evtchn, nonblock;
+
+ pvcalls_enter;
+ if (!pvcalls_front_dev) {
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -ENOTCONN;
+ }
+ bedata = dev_get_drvdata(&pvcalls_front_dev->dev);
+
+ map = (struct sock_mapping *) sock->sk->sk_send_head;
+ if (!map) {
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -ENOTSOCK;
+ }
+
+ if (map->passive.status != PVCALLS_STATUS_LISTEN) {
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ nonblock = flags & SOCK_NONBLOCK;
+ /*
+ * Backend only supports 1 inflight accept request, will return
+ * errors for the others
+ */
+ if (test_and_set_bit(PVCALLS_FLAG_ACCEPT_INFLIGHT,
+ (void *)&map->passive.flags)) {
+ req_id = READ_ONCE(map->passive.inflight_req_id);
+ if (req_id != PVCALLS_INVALID_ID &&
+ READ_ONCE(bedata->rsp[req_id].req_id) == req_id) {
+ map2 = map->passive.accept_map;
+ goto received;
+ }
+ if (nonblock) {
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -EAGAIN;
+ }
+ if (wait_event_interruptible(map->passive.inflight_accept_req,
+ !test_and_set_bit(PVCALLS_FLAG_ACCEPT_INFLIGHT,
+ (void *)&map->passive.flags))) {
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -EINTR;
+ }
+ }
+
+ spin_lock(&bedata->socket_lock);
+ ret = get_request(bedata, &req_id);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ spin_unlock(&bedata->socket_lock);
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return ret;
+ }
+ map2 = kzalloc(sizeof(*map2), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (map2 == NULL) {
+ spin_unlock(&bedata->socket_lock);
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+ ret = create_active(map2, &evtchn);
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ kfree(map2);
+ spin_unlock(&bedata->socket_lock);
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }

Do you need to clear PVCALLS_FLAG_ACCEPT_INFLIGHT bit on errors (except for EAGAIN/EINTR)?

+ list_add_tail(&map2->list, &bedata->socket_mappings);
+
+ req = RING_GET_REQUEST(&bedata->ring, req_id);
+ req->req_id = req_id;
+ req->cmd = PVCALLS_ACCEPT;
+ req->u.accept.id = (uint64_t) map;
+ req->u.accept.ref = map2->active.ref;
+ req->u.accept.id_new = (uint64_t) map2;
+ req->u.accept.evtchn = evtchn;
+ map->passive.accept_map = map2;
+
+ bedata->ring.req_prod_pvt++;
+ RING_PUSH_REQUESTS_AND_CHECK_NOTIFY(&bedata->ring, notify);
+ spin_unlock(&bedata->socket_lock);
+ if (notify)
+ notify_remote_via_irq(bedata->irq);
+ /* We could check if we have received a response before returning. */
+ if (nonblock) {
+ WRITE_ONCE(map->passive.inflight_req_id, req_id);
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -EAGAIN;
+ }
+
+ if (wait_event_interruptible(bedata->inflight_req,
+ READ_ONCE(bedata->rsp[req_id].req_id) == req_id)) {
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -EINTR;
+ }
+
+received:
+ map2->sock = newsock;
+ newsock->sk = kzalloc(sizeof(*newsock->sk), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!newsock->sk) {
+ WRITE_ONCE(bedata->rsp[req_id].req_id, PVCALLS_INVALID_ID);
+ WRITE_ONCE(map->passive.inflight_req_id, PVCALLS_INVALID_ID);
+ pvcalls_front_free_map(bedata, map2);
+ kfree(map2);
+ pvcalls_exit;
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+ newsock->sk->sk_send_head = (void *)map2;
+
+ clear_bit(PVCALLS_FLAG_ACCEPT_INFLIGHT, (void *)&map->passive.flags);
+ wake_up(&map->passive.inflight_accept_req);
+
+ ret = bedata->rsp[req_id].ret;
+ /* read ret, then set this rsp slot to be reused */
+ smp_mb();
+ WRITE_ONCE(bedata->rsp[req_id].req_id, PVCALLS_INVALID_ID);
+ WRITE_ONCE(map->passive.inflight_req_id, PVCALLS_INVALID_ID);

Should inflight_req_id be cleared at the same time as PVCALLS_FLAG_ACCEPT_INFLIGHT? They kind of belong together, don't they?

And I wonder whether you actually need the flag --- can you just key off map->passive.inflight_req_id not being PVCALLS_INVALID_ID?

(and again, I am not sure about all READ/WRITE_ONCE() macros here).


-boris