tech-kern archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: vwakeup: neg numoutput



On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 11:14:01PM +0200, Manuel Bouyer wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 29, 2008 at 02:03:18PM -0600, Greg Oster wrote:
> > > Its done it to me 4 or 5 times now.  Trying to scp or rdist about 7GB 
> > > of /usr/pkg and /usr/local to the domU, it gets about 1 or 2 GB 
> > > transferred then the dom0 panics :-(
> > 
> > In both xbdback_xenbus.c and xbdback.c we have this code:
> > 
> >     if ((xbd_io->xio_buf.b_flags & B_READ) == 0)
> >             xbd_io->xio_buf.b_vp->v_numoutput++;
> > 
> > Should this not read:
> > 
> >     if ((xbd_io->xio_buf.b_flags & B_READ) == 0) {
> >             mutex_enter(&xbd_io->xio_buf.b_vp->v_interlock);
> >             xbd_io->xio_buf.b_vp->v_numoutput++;
> >             mutex_exit(&xbd_io->xio_buf.b_vp->v_interlock);
> >         }
> > 
> > (or somesuch) to properly update v_numoutput ?  Most other changes
> > to v_numoutput are holding the vp->v_interlock, but if this one is, 
> > I'm completely missing how it's doing it...
> 
> I think you're right, the interlock is not taken here.
> But we have a problem: at this point we are in interrupt context.
> Can we take this mutex from interrupt context ?

Would this be a good candidate for the atomic update operations? That way 
you don't need a lock.

Take care,

Bill

Attachment: pgp3DIVS0kQDO.pgp
Description: PGP signature



Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index