From: Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>
To: Meir Elisha <meir.elisha@volumez.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Chaitanya Kulkarni <kch@nvidia.com>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@grimberg.me>,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] nvmet-tcp: Enforce update ordering between queue->cmd and rcv_state
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 08:19:28 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z7SlAMLxwjuRwEBe@kbusch-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250217142210.2144548-1-meir.elisha@volumez.com>
On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 04:22:10PM +0200, Meir Elisha wrote:
> The order in which queue->cmd and rcv_state are updated is crucial.
> If these assignments are reordered by the compiler, the worker might not
> get queued in nvmet_tcp_queue_response(), hanging the IO. to enforce the
> the correct reordering, set rcv_state using smp_store_release().
>
> Signed-off-by: Meir Elisha <meir.elisha@volumez.com>
> ---
> v2: Change comments to c-style
>
> drivers/nvme/target/tcp.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvme/target/tcp.c b/drivers/nvme/target/tcp.c
> index 7c51c2a8c109..49ce2f9ac6c8 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvme/target/tcp.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvme/target/tcp.c
> @@ -848,7 +848,8 @@ static void nvmet_prepare_receive_pdu(struct nvmet_tcp_queue *queue)
> queue->offset = 0;
> queue->left = sizeof(struct nvme_tcp_hdr);
> queue->cmd = NULL;
> - queue->rcv_state = NVMET_TCP_RECV_PDU;
> + /* Ensure rcv_state is visible only after queue->cmd is set */
> + smp_store_release(&queue->rcv_state, NVMET_TCP_RECV_PDU);
> }
>
> static void nvmet_tcp_free_crypto(struct nvmet_tcp_queue *queue)
> @@ -1017,7 +1018,8 @@ static int nvmet_tcp_handle_h2c_data_pdu(struct nvmet_tcp_queue *queue)
> cmd->pdu_recv = 0;
> nvmet_tcp_build_pdu_iovec(cmd);
> queue->cmd = cmd;
> - queue->rcv_state = NVMET_TCP_RECV_DATA;
> + /* Ensure rcv_state is visible only after queue->cmd is set */
> + smp_store_release(&queue->rcv_state, NVMET_TCP_RECV_DATA);
>
> return 0;
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>
> This ordering is critical on weakly ordered architectures (such as ARM)
> so that any observer which sees the new rcv_state is guaranteed to also
> see the updated cmd.
Something seems off if smp_store_release() isn't paired with
smp_load_acquire(). Why does the reader side not need a barrier?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-18 15:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-17 14:22 [PATCH v2] nvmet-tcp: Enforce update ordering between queue->cmd and rcv_state Meir Elisha
2025-02-18 15:19 ` Keith Busch [this message]
2025-02-19 12:28 ` Meir Elisha
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=Z7SlAMLxwjuRwEBe@kbusch-mbp \
--to=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=kch@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=meir.elisha@volumez.com \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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