Re: [PATCH net-next 1/3] net/smc: refactoring lgr pending lock

[Dust Li <dust.li@linux.alibaba.com>]

On 2024-11-13 15:14:03, D. Wythe wrote:
>This patch replaces the locking and unlocking of lgr pending with
>a unified inline function, and since the granularity of lgr pending
>lock is within the lifecycle of init_info, which make it possible
>to record the lock state on init_info, which provides a potential
>functionality for multiple unlocks without triggering exceptions, which

Since we already have lockdep, I am skeptical about the usefulness of
this feature.

>creates conditions to reduce the scope of locks in the future.

>
>Signed-off-by: D. Wythe <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>
>---
> net/smc/af_smc.c   | 24 ++++++++++++------------
> net/smc/smc_core.h | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c
>index 9d76e902fd77..19480d8affb0 100644
>--- a/net/smc/af_smc.c
>+++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c
>@@ -1251,10 +1251,10 @@ static int smc_connect_rdma(struct smc_sock *smc,
> 	if (reason_code)
> 		return reason_code;
> 
>-	mutex_lock(&smc_client_lgr_pending);
>+	smc_lgr_pending_lock(ini, &smc_client_lgr_pending);
> 	reason_code = smc_conn_create(smc, ini);
> 	if (reason_code) {
>-		mutex_unlock(&smc_client_lgr_pending);
>+		smc_lgr_pending_unlock(ini);
> 		return reason_code;
> 	}
> 
>@@ -1343,7 +1343,7 @@ static int smc_connect_rdma(struct smc_sock *smc,
> 		if (reason_code)
> 			goto connect_abort;
> 	}
>-	mutex_unlock(&smc_client_lgr_pending);
>+	smc_lgr_pending_unlock(ini);
> 
> 	smc_copy_sock_settings_to_clc(smc);
> 	smc->connect_nonblock = 0;
>@@ -1353,7 +1353,7 @@ static int smc_connect_rdma(struct smc_sock *smc,
> 	return 0;
> connect_abort:
> 	smc_conn_abort(smc, ini->first_contact_local);
>-	mutex_unlock(&smc_client_lgr_pending);
>+	smc_lgr_pending_unlock(ini);
> 	smc->connect_nonblock = 0;
> 
> 	return reason_code;
>@@ -1412,10 +1412,10 @@ static int smc_connect_ism(struct smc_sock *smc,
> 	ini->ism_peer_gid[ini->ism_selected].gid = ntohll(aclc->d0.gid);
> 
> 	/* there is only one lgr role for SMC-D; use server lock */
>-	mutex_lock(&smc_server_lgr_pending);
>+	smc_lgr_pending_lock(ini, &smc_server_lgr_pending);
> 	rc = smc_conn_create(smc, ini);
> 	if (rc) {
>-		mutex_unlock(&smc_server_lgr_pending);
>+		smc_lgr_pending_unlock(ini);
> 		return rc;
> 	}
> 
>@@ -1446,7 +1446,7 @@ static int smc_connect_ism(struct smc_sock *smc,
> 				  aclc->hdr.version, eid, ini);
> 	if (rc)
> 		goto connect_abort;
>-	mutex_unlock(&smc_server_lgr_pending);
>+	smc_lgr_pending_unlock(ini);
> 
> 	smc_copy_sock_settings_to_clc(smc);
> 	smc->connect_nonblock = 0;
>@@ -1456,7 +1456,7 @@ static int smc_connect_ism(struct smc_sock *smc,
> 	return 0;
> connect_abort:
> 	smc_conn_abort(smc, ini->first_contact_local);
>-	mutex_unlock(&smc_server_lgr_pending);
>+	smc_lgr_pending_unlock(ini);
> 	smc->connect_nonblock = 0;
> 
> 	return rc;
>@@ -2478,7 +2478,7 @@ static void smc_listen_work(struct work_struct *work)
> 	if (rc)
> 		goto out_decl;
> 
>-	mutex_lock(&smc_server_lgr_pending);
>+	smc_lgr_pending_lock(ini, &smc_server_lgr_pending);
> 	smc_close_init(new_smc);
> 	smc_rx_init(new_smc);
> 	smc_tx_init(new_smc);
>@@ -2497,7 +2497,7 @@ static void smc_listen_work(struct work_struct *work)
> 
> 	/* SMC-D does not need this lock any more */
> 	if (ini->is_smcd)
>-		mutex_unlock(&smc_server_lgr_pending);
>+		smc_lgr_pending_unlock(ini);
> 
> 	/* receive SMC Confirm CLC message */
> 	memset(buf, 0, sizeof(*buf));
>@@ -2528,7 +2528,7 @@ static void smc_listen_work(struct work_struct *work)
> 					    ini->first_contact_local, ini);
> 		if (rc)
> 			goto out_unlock;
>-		mutex_unlock(&smc_server_lgr_pending);
>+		smc_lgr_pending_unlock(ini);
> 	}
> 	smc_conn_save_peer_info(new_smc, cclc);
> 
>@@ -2544,7 +2544,7 @@ static void smc_listen_work(struct work_struct *work)
> 	goto out_free;
> 
> out_unlock:
>-	mutex_unlock(&smc_server_lgr_pending);
>+	smc_lgr_pending_unlock(ini);
> out_decl:
> 	smc_listen_decline(new_smc, rc, ini ? ini->first_contact_local : 0,
> 			   proposal_version);
>diff --git a/net/smc/smc_core.h b/net/smc/smc_core.h
>index 69b54ecd6503..5abe9438772c 100644
>--- a/net/smc/smc_core.h
>+++ b/net/smc/smc_core.h
>@@ -432,6 +432,8 @@ struct smc_init_info {
> 	u8			ism_offered_cnt; /* # of ISM devices offered */
> 	u8			ism_selected;    /* index of selected ISM dev*/
> 	u8			smcd_version;
>+	/* mutex holding for conn create */
>+	struct mutex *mutex;
> };
> 
> /* Find the connection associated with the given alert token in the link group.
>@@ -600,6 +602,33 @@ int smcr_nl_get_lgr(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *cb);
> int smcr_nl_get_link(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *cb);
> int smcd_nl_get_lgr(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netlink_callback *cb);
> 
>+static inline void smc_lgr_pending_lock(struct smc_init_info *ini, struct mutex *lock)
>+{
>+	if (unlikely(ini->mutex))
>+		pr_warn_once("smc: lgr pending deadlock dected.");
>+
>+	mutex_lock(lock);
>+	ini->mutex = lock;
>+}
>+
>+/* It will save the locking status of the ini, which provides a potential functionality
>+ * for multiple unlocks without triggering exceptions. This creates conditions
>+ * to reduce the scope of locks in the future.
>+ */
>+static inline void smc_lgr_pending_unlock(struct smc_init_info *ini)
>+{
>+	/* tempory */
>+	struct mutex *lock;
>+
>+	/* already unlock it, just return */
>+	if (!ini->mutex)
>+		return;
>+
>+	lock = ini->mutex;
>+	ini->mutex = NULL;
>+	mutex_unlock(lock);
>+}
>+
> static inline struct smc_link_group *smc_get_lgr(struct smc_link *link)
> {
> 	return link->lgr;
>-- 
>2.45.0
>