On Mon, 16 Apr 2018 08:24:51 +0200,In this loop I have:
Oleksandr Andrushchenko wrote:
+static irqreturn_t evtchnl_interrupt_req(int irq, void *dev_id)I'm not familiar with Xen stuff in general, but through a quick
+{
+ struct xen_snd_front_evtchnl *channel = dev_id;
+ struct xen_snd_front_info *front_info = channel->front_info;
+ struct xensnd_resp *resp;
+ RING_IDX i, rp;
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ if (unlikely(channel->state != EVTCHNL_STATE_CONNECTED))
+ return IRQ_HANDLED;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&front_info->io_lock, flags);
+
+again:
+ rp = channel->u.req.ring.sring->rsp_prod;
+ /* ensure we see queued responses up to rp */
+ rmb();
+
+ for (i = channel->u.req.ring.rsp_cons; i != rp; i++) {
glance, this kind of code worries me a bit.
If channel->u.req.ring.rsp_cons has a bogus number, this may lead to a
very long loop, no? Better to have a sanity check of the ring buffer
size.
Same as above+static irqreturn_t evtchnl_interrupt_evt(int irq, void *dev_id)Ditto.
+{
+ struct xen_snd_front_evtchnl *channel = dev_id;
+ struct xen_snd_front_info *front_info = channel->front_info;
+ struct xensnd_event_page *page = channel->u.evt.page;
+ u32 cons, prod;
+ unsigned long flags;
+
+ if (unlikely(channel->state != EVTCHNL_STATE_CONNECTED))
+ return IRQ_HANDLED;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&front_info->io_lock, flags);
+
+ prod = page->in_prod;
+ /* ensure we see ring contents up to prod */
+ virt_rmb();
+ if (prod == page->in_cons)
+ goto out;
+
+ for (cons = page->in_cons; cons != prod; cons++) {
Thank you,
thanks,
Takashi