From: Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@nvidia.com>
To: Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com>,
"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"alex.williamson@redhat.com" <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/8] vfio/mdev: Fix aborting mdev child device removal if one fails
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 01:05:34 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d3a9ba59-59dd-7924-72e0-09652dce8914@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1553296835-37522-8-git-send-email-parav@mellanox.com>
On 3/23/2019 4:50 AM, Parav Pandit wrote:
> device_for_each_child() stops executing callback function for remaining
> child devices, if callback hits an error.
> Each child mdev device is independent of each other.
> While unregistering parent device, mdev core must remove all child mdev
> devices.
> Therefore, mdev_device_remove_cb() always returns success so that
> device_for_each_child doesn't abort if one child removal hits error.
>
When unregistering parent device, force_remove is set to true amd
mdev_device_remove_ops() always returns success.
> While at it, improve remove and unregister functions for below simplicity.
>
> There isn't need to pass forced flag pointer during mdev parent
> removal which invokes mdev_device_remove().
There is a need to pass the flag, pasting here the comment above
mdev_device_remove_ops() which explains why the flag is needed:
/*
* mdev_device_remove_ops gets called from sysfs's 'remove' and when parent
* device is being unregistered from mdev device framework.
* - 'force_remove' is set to 'false' when called from sysfs's 'remove'
which
* indicates that if the mdev device is active, used by VMM or userspace
* application, vendor driver could return error then don't remove the
device.
* - 'force_remove' is set to 'true' when called from
mdev_unregister_device()
* which indicate that parent device is being removed from mdev device
* framework so remove mdev device forcefully.
*/
Thanks,
Kirti
So simplify the flow.
>
> mdev_device_remove() is called from two paths.
> 1. mdev_unregister_driver()
> mdev_device_remove_cb()
> mdev_device_remove()
> 2. remove_store()
> mdev_device_remove()
>
> When device is removed by user using remote_store(), device under
> removal is mdev device.
> When device is removed during parent device removal using generic child
> iterator, mdev check is already done using dev_is_mdev().
>
> Hence, remove the unnecessary loop in mdev_device_remove().
>
> Fixes: 7b96953bc640 ("vfio: Mediated device Core driver")
> Signed-off-by: Parav Pandit <parav@mellanox.com>
> ---
> drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_core.c | 24 +++++-------------------
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_core.c b/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_core.c
> index ab05464..944a058 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/mdev/mdev_core.c
> @@ -150,10 +150,10 @@ static int mdev_device_remove_ops(struct mdev_device *mdev, bool force_remove)
>
> static int mdev_device_remove_cb(struct device *dev, void *data)
> {
> - if (!dev_is_mdev(dev))
> - return 0;
> + if (dev_is_mdev(dev))
> + mdev_device_remove(dev, true);
>
> - return mdev_device_remove(dev, data ? *(bool *)data : true);
> + return 0;
> }
>
> /*
> @@ -241,7 +241,6 @@ int mdev_register_device(struct device *dev, const struct mdev_parent_ops *ops)
> void mdev_unregister_device(struct device *dev)
> {
> struct mdev_parent *parent;
> - bool force_remove = true;
>
> mutex_lock(&parent_list_lock);
> parent = __find_parent_device(dev);
> @@ -255,8 +254,7 @@ void mdev_unregister_device(struct device *dev)
> list_del(&parent->next);
> class_compat_remove_link(mdev_bus_compat_class, dev, NULL);
>
> - device_for_each_child(dev, (void *)&force_remove,
> - mdev_device_remove_cb);
> + device_for_each_child(dev, NULL, mdev_device_remove_cb);
>
> parent_remove_sysfs_files(parent);
>
> @@ -346,24 +344,12 @@ int mdev_device_create(struct kobject *kobj, struct device *dev, uuid_le uuid)
>
> int mdev_device_remove(struct device *dev, bool force_remove)
> {
> - struct mdev_device *mdev, *tmp;
> + struct mdev_device *mdev;
> struct mdev_parent *parent;
> struct mdev_type *type;
> int ret;
>
> mdev = to_mdev_device(dev);
> -
> - mutex_lock(&mdev_list_lock);
> - list_for_each_entry(tmp, &mdev_list, next) {
> - if (tmp == mdev)
> - break;
> - }
> -
> - if (tmp != mdev) {
> - mutex_unlock(&mdev_list_lock);
> - return -ENODEV;
> - }
> -
> if (!mdev->active) {
> mutex_unlock(&mdev_list_lock);
> return -EAGAIN;
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-25 19:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-22 23:20 [PATCH 0/8] vfio/mdev: Improve vfio/mdev core module Parav Pandit
2019-03-22 23:20 ` [PATCH 1/8] vfio/mdev: Fix to not do put_device on device_register failure Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 11:48 ` Maxim Levitsky
2019-03-25 18:17 ` Kirti Wankhede
2019-03-25 19:21 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-25 21:11 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-22 23:20 ` [PATCH 2/8] vfio/mdev: Avoid release parent reference during error path Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 11:49 ` Maxim Levitsky
2019-03-25 18:27 ` Kirti Wankhede
2019-03-22 23:20 ` [PATCH 3/8] vfio/mdev: Removed unused kref Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 11:50 ` Maxim Levitsky
2019-03-25 18:41 ` Kirti Wankhede
2019-03-22 23:20 ` [PATCH 4/8] vfio/mdev: Drop redundant extern for exported symbols Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 11:56 ` Maxim Levitsky
2019-03-25 19:07 ` Kirti Wankhede
2019-03-25 19:49 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-25 21:27 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-22 23:20 ` [PATCH 5/8] vfio/mdev: Avoid masking error code to EBUSY Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 11:57 ` Maxim Levitsky
2019-03-25 19:18 ` Kirti Wankhede
2019-03-25 21:29 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-22 23:20 ` [PATCH 6/8] vfio/mdev: Follow correct remove sequence Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 11:58 ` Maxim Levitsky
2019-03-25 20:20 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-25 21:31 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-22 23:20 ` [PATCH 7/8] vfio/mdev: Fix aborting mdev child device removal if one fails Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 11:58 ` Maxim Levitsky
2019-03-25 19:35 ` Kirti Wankhede [this message]
2019-03-25 20:49 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-25 21:36 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 21:52 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-25 22:07 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-22 23:20 ` [PATCH 8/8] vfio/mdev: Improve the create/remove sequence Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 13:24 ` Maxim Levitsky
2019-03-25 21:42 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-25 23:18 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-25 23:34 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-26 0:05 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-26 1:43 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-26 2:16 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-26 3:19 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-26 5:53 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-26 15:21 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-26 7:06 ` Kirti Wankhede
2019-03-26 15:26 ` Alex Williamson
2019-03-27 3:19 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-26 15:30 ` Parav Pandit
2019-03-28 17:20 ` Kirti Wankhede
2019-03-29 14:49 ` Alex Williamson
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=d3a9ba59-59dd-7924-72e0-09652dce8914@nvidia.com \
--to=kwankhede@nvidia.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=parav@mellanox.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox