From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
To: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
Cc: virtio-fs@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] virtiofsd: vu_dispatch locking should never fail
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 11:24:34 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YCurchq2xzD+QyaO@work-vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210203182434.93870-1-groug@kaod.org>
* Greg Kurz (groug@kaod.org) wrote:
> pthread_rwlock_rdlock() and pthread_rwlock_wrlock() can fail if a
> deadlock condition is detected or the current thread already owns
> the lock. They can also fail, like pthread_rwlock_unlock(), if the
> mutex wasn't properly initialized. None of these are ever expected
> to happen with fv_VuDev::vu_dispatch_rwlock.
>
> Some users already check the return value and assert, some others
> don't. Introduce rdlock/wrlock/unlock wrappers that just do the
> former and use them everywhere for improved consistency and
> robustness.
>
> This is just cleanup. It doesn't fix any actual issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kurz <groug@kaod.org>
Queued
> ---
>
> v2: - open-code helpers instead of defining them with a macro (Vivek, Stefan)
> - fixed rd/wr typo in fv_queue_thread() (Stefan)
> - make it clear in the changelog this is just cleanup (Stefan)
>
> tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 35 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
> index ddcefee4272f..523ee64fb7ae 100644
> --- a/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
> +++ b/tools/virtiofsd/fuse_virtio.c
> @@ -187,6 +187,31 @@ static void copy_iov(struct iovec *src_iov, int src_count,
> }
> }
>
> +/*
> + * pthread_rwlock_rdlock() and pthread_rwlock_wrlock can fail if
> + * a deadlock condition is detected or the current thread already
> + * owns the lock. They can also fail, like pthread_rwlock_unlock(),
> + * if the mutex wasn't properly initialized. None of these are ever
> + * expected to happen.
> + */
> +static void vu_dispatch_rdlock(struct fv_VuDev *vud)
> +{
> + int ret = pthread_rwlock_rdlock(&vud->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + assert(ret == 0);
> +}
> +
> +static void vu_dispatch_wrlock(struct fv_VuDev *vud)
> +{
> + int ret = pthread_rwlock_wrlock(&vud->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + assert(ret == 0);
> +}
> +
> +static void vu_dispatch_unlock(struct fv_VuDev *vud)
> +{
> + int ret = pthread_rwlock_unlock(&vud->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + assert(ret == 0);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Called back by ll whenever it wants to send a reply/message back
> * The 1st element of the iov starts with the fuse_out_header
> @@ -240,12 +265,12 @@ int virtio_send_msg(struct fuse_session *se, struct fuse_chan *ch,
>
> copy_iov(iov, count, in_sg, in_num, tosend_len);
>
> - pthread_rwlock_rdlock(&qi->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + vu_dispatch_rdlock(qi->virtio_dev);
> pthread_mutex_lock(&qi->vq_lock);
> vu_queue_push(dev, q, elem, tosend_len);
> vu_queue_notify(dev, q);
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&qi->vq_lock);
> - pthread_rwlock_unlock(&qi->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + vu_dispatch_unlock(qi->virtio_dev);
>
> req->reply_sent = true;
>
> @@ -403,12 +428,12 @@ int virtio_send_data_iov(struct fuse_session *se, struct fuse_chan *ch,
>
> ret = 0;
>
> - pthread_rwlock_rdlock(&qi->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + vu_dispatch_rdlock(qi->virtio_dev);
> pthread_mutex_lock(&qi->vq_lock);
> vu_queue_push(dev, q, elem, tosend_len);
> vu_queue_notify(dev, q);
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&qi->vq_lock);
> - pthread_rwlock_unlock(&qi->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + vu_dispatch_unlock(qi->virtio_dev);
>
> err:
> if (ret == 0) {
> @@ -558,12 +583,12 @@ out:
> fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_DEBUG, "%s: elem %d no reply sent\n", __func__,
> elem->index);
>
> - pthread_rwlock_rdlock(&qi->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + vu_dispatch_rdlock(qi->virtio_dev);
> pthread_mutex_lock(&qi->vq_lock);
> vu_queue_push(dev, q, elem, 0);
> vu_queue_notify(dev, q);
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&qi->vq_lock);
> - pthread_rwlock_unlock(&qi->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + vu_dispatch_unlock(qi->virtio_dev);
> }
>
> pthread_mutex_destroy(&req->ch.lock);
> @@ -596,7 +621,6 @@ static void *fv_queue_thread(void *opaque)
> qi->qidx, qi->kick_fd);
> while (1) {
> struct pollfd pf[2];
> - int ret;
>
> pf[0].fd = qi->kick_fd;
> pf[0].events = POLLIN;
> @@ -645,8 +669,7 @@ static void *fv_queue_thread(void *opaque)
> break;
> }
> /* Mutual exclusion with virtio_loop() */
> - ret = pthread_rwlock_rdlock(&qi->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> - assert(ret == 0); /* there is no possible error case */
> + vu_dispatch_rdlock(qi->virtio_dev);
> pthread_mutex_lock(&qi->vq_lock);
> /* out is from guest, in is too guest */
> unsigned int in_bytes, out_bytes;
> @@ -672,7 +695,7 @@ static void *fv_queue_thread(void *opaque)
> }
>
> pthread_mutex_unlock(&qi->vq_lock);
> - pthread_rwlock_unlock(&qi->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + vu_dispatch_unlock(qi->virtio_dev);
>
> /* Process all the requests. */
> if (!se->thread_pool_size && req_list != NULL) {
> @@ -799,7 +822,6 @@ int virtio_loop(struct fuse_session *se)
> while (!fuse_session_exited(se)) {
> struct pollfd pf[1];
> bool ok;
> - int ret;
> pf[0].fd = se->vu_socketfd;
> pf[0].events = POLLIN;
> pf[0].revents = 0;
> @@ -825,12 +847,11 @@ int virtio_loop(struct fuse_session *se)
> assert(pf[0].revents & POLLIN);
> fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_DEBUG, "%s: Got VU event\n", __func__);
> /* Mutual exclusion with fv_queue_thread() */
> - ret = pthread_rwlock_wrlock(&se->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> - assert(ret == 0); /* there is no possible error case */
> + vu_dispatch_wrlock(se->virtio_dev);
>
> ok = vu_dispatch(&se->virtio_dev->dev);
>
> - pthread_rwlock_unlock(&se->virtio_dev->vu_dispatch_rwlock);
> + vu_dispatch_unlock(se->virtio_dev);
>
> if (!ok) {
> fuse_log(FUSE_LOG_ERR, "%s: vu_dispatch failed\n", __func__);
> --
> 2.26.2
>
>
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-16 11:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-03 18:24 [PATCH v2] virtiofsd: vu_dispatch locking should never fail Greg Kurz
2021-02-03 20:23 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-02-04 9:37 ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2021-02-16 11:24 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert [this message]
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=YCurchq2xzD+QyaO@work-vm \
--to=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=groug@kaod.org \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=virtio-fs@redhat.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).