From: Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Jie Deng <jie.deng@intel.com>, "wsa@kernel.org" <wsa@kernel.org>,
"virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
kernel <kernel@axis.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: virtio: fix completion handling
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:38:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211020103849.GA9985@axis.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211020091721.7kcihpevzf7h4d62@vireshk-i7>
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 11:17:21AM +0200, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 20-10-21, 16:54, Jie Deng wrote:
> >
> > On 2021/10/19 16:22, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 19-10-21, 09:46, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> > > > static void virtio_i2c_msg_done(struct virtqueue *vq)
> > > > {
> > > > - struct virtio_i2c *vi = vq->vdev->priv;
> > > > + struct virtio_i2c_req *req;
> > > > + unsigned int len;
> > > > - complete(&vi->completion);
> > > > + while ((req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len)))
> > > > + complete(&req->completion);
> > > Instead of adding a completion for each request and using only the
> > > last one, maybe we can do this instead here:
> > >
> > > while ((req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len))) {
> > > if (req->out_hdr.flags == cpu_to_le32(VIRTIO_I2C_FLAGS_FAIL_NEXT))
> >
> >
> > Is this for the last one check ? For the last one, this bit should be
> > cleared, right ?
>
> Oops, you are right. This should be `!=` instead. Thanks.
I don't quite understand how that would be safe since
virtqueue_add_sgs() can fail after a few iterations and all queued
request buffers can have FAIL_NEXT set. In such a case, we would end up
waiting forever with your proposed change, wouldn't we?
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
"wsa@kernel.org" <wsa@kernel.org>, kernel <kernel@axis.com>,
"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: virtio: fix completion handling
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 12:38:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211020103849.GA9985@axis.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211020091721.7kcihpevzf7h4d62@vireshk-i7>
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 11:17:21AM +0200, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 20-10-21, 16:54, Jie Deng wrote:
> >
> > On 2021/10/19 16:22, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > > On 19-10-21, 09:46, Vincent Whitchurch wrote:
> > > > static void virtio_i2c_msg_done(struct virtqueue *vq)
> > > > {
> > > > - struct virtio_i2c *vi = vq->vdev->priv;
> > > > + struct virtio_i2c_req *req;
> > > > + unsigned int len;
> > > > - complete(&vi->completion);
> > > > + while ((req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len)))
> > > > + complete(&req->completion);
> > > Instead of adding a completion for each request and using only the
> > > last one, maybe we can do this instead here:
> > >
> > > while ((req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len))) {
> > > if (req->out_hdr.flags == cpu_to_le32(VIRTIO_I2C_FLAGS_FAIL_NEXT))
> >
> >
> > Is this for the last one check ? For the last one, this bit should be
> > cleared, right ?
>
> Oops, you are right. This should be `!=` instead. Thanks.
I don't quite understand how that would be safe since
virtqueue_add_sgs() can fail after a few iterations and all queued
request buffers can have FAIL_NEXT set. In such a case, we would end up
waiting forever with your proposed change, wouldn't we?
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-20 10:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-19 7:46 [PATCH 0/2] virtio-i2c: Fix buffer handling Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-19 7:46 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-19 7:46 ` [PATCH 1/2] i2c: virtio: disable timeout handling Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-19 7:46 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-19 8:09 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-19 8:09 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-19 9:36 ` Greg KH
2021-10-19 9:36 ` Greg KH
2021-10-19 9:42 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-19 9:42 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-19 11:15 ` Wolfram Sang
2021-10-19 14:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-19 14:14 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-19 11:16 ` Greg KH
2021-10-19 11:16 ` Greg KH
2021-10-19 14:37 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-19 14:37 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-19 18:14 ` Wolfram Sang
2021-10-20 4:20 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-20 4:20 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-20 5:36 ` Greg KH
2021-10-20 5:36 ` Greg KH
2021-10-20 6:35 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-20 6:35 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-20 6:41 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-20 6:41 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-20 7:04 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-20 7:04 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-20 10:55 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-20 10:55 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-20 11:03 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-20 11:03 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-21 3:30 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-21 3:30 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-29 12:24 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-29 12:24 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-11-01 5:23 ` Jie Deng
2021-11-01 5:23 ` Jie Deng
2021-11-03 6:18 ` Chen, Conghui
2021-11-03 6:37 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-11-03 6:37 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-11-03 14:42 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-11-03 14:42 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-11-09 4:52 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-11-09 4:52 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-20 3:36 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-20 3:36 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-19 7:46 ` [PATCH 2/2] i2c: virtio: fix completion handling Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-19 7:46 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-19 8:22 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-19 8:22 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-20 8:54 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-20 8:54 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-20 9:17 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-20 9:17 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-20 10:38 ` Vincent Whitchurch [this message]
2021-10-20 10:38 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-20 10:47 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-20 10:47 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-29 11:54 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-29 11:54 ` Vincent Whitchurch
2021-10-21 5:55 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-21 5:55 ` Jie Deng
2021-10-21 5:58 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-10-21 5:58 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-11-02 4:32 ` Viresh Kumar
2021-11-02 4:32 ` Viresh Kumar
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=20211020103849.GA9985@axis.com \
--to=vincent.whitchurch@axis.com \
--cc=jie.deng@intel.com \
--cc=kernel@axis.com \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=wsa@kernel.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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.