Re: [PATCH v3 10/14] RDMA/ionic: Register device ops for control path

Abhijit Gangurde
2025-07-20T08:39:16Z

On 7/16/25 00:46, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2025 at 09:27:53AM +0300, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>> Let's do what all other drivers do, please. I prefer simplest solution
>> and objects that can potentially be around after verbs objects were
>> cleaned doesn't sound right.
> I think it is OK, at least QP makes sense and matches some other
> drivers.
>
> +static void ionic_qp_event(struct ionic_ibdev *dev, u32 qpid, u8 code)
> +{
> + struct ib_event ibev;
> + struct ionic_qp *qp;
> +
> + rcu_read_lock();
> + qp = xa_load(&dev->qp_tbl, qpid);
> + if (qp)
> + kref_get(&qp->qp_kref);
> + rcu_read_unlock();
> +
>
> The above is an async event path, and the kref is effectively the open
> coded rwlock pattern we use often.
>
> The unlock triggers a completion:
>
> + kref_put(&qp->qp_kref, ionic_qp_complete);
> +static inline void ionic_qp_complete(struct kref *kref)
> +{
> + struct ionic_qp *qp = container_of(kref, struct ionic_qp, qp_kref);
> +
> + complete(&qp->qp_rel_comp);
> +}
>
> Which acts as the unlock. And then qp destruction:
>
> +int ionic_destroy_qp(struct ib_qp *ibqp, struct ib_udata *udata)
> +{
> + kref_put(&qp->qp_kref, ionic_qp_complete);
> + wait_for_completion(&qp->qp_rel_comp);
>
> Which is the typical "write" side of the lock.
>
> So this is all normal, the qp doesn't outlive destroy, destroy waits
> for all the async event deliver to complete. It has to, we free the
> underlying memory in the core code.
>
> As long as the other case are like this it is fine
>
> + xa_erase_irq(&dev->qp_tbl, qp->qpid);
> + synchronize_rcu();
>
> This should go away though, don't like to see synchronize_rcu(). The
> idea is you kfree the QP with RCU. But the core code doesn't do that..
>
> So in the short term you should take the lock instead of using rcu:
>
> xa_lock(&dev->qp_tbl);
> qp = xa_load(&dev->qp_tbl, qpid);
> if (qp)
> kref_get(&qp->qp_kref);
>
> Jason

Thank you, Jason, for reviewing the logic and explaining how the
kref/RCU mechanism effectively ensures correct synchronization and clean
tear down during async event handling and QP destruction. A similar
mechanism is currently used for CQ event handling and destruction as well.

Your suggestion to avoid synchronize_rcu() and instead take the lock
directly for xarray lookups makes sense. I will proceed to replace the
RCU critical section with xa_lock()/xa_load(), as you outlined, to
better align with current best practices—unless there are any objections.

Thanks again for the valuable feedback!

Abhijit