From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
To: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Cc: <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>, <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <JBeulich@suse.com>,
<david.vrabel@citrix.com>, <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 4/4] xen/xenbus: Avoid synchronous wait on XenBus stalling shutdown/restart.
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:52:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <528E485C.5030906@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1383932286-25080-5-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
On 08/11/13 17:38, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> The 'read_reply' works with 'process_msg' to read of a reply in XenBus.
> 'process_msg' is running from within the 'xenbus' thread. Whenever
> a message shows up in XenBus it is put on a xs_state.reply_list list
> and 'read_reply' picks it up.
>
> The problem is if the backend domain or the xenstored process is killed.
> In which case 'xenbus' is still awaiting - and 'read_reply' if called -
> stuck forever waiting for the reply_list to have some contents.
>
> This is normally not a problem - as the backend domain can come back
> or the xenstored process can be restarted. However if the domain
> is in process of being powered off/restarted/halted - there is no
> point of waiting on it coming back - as we are effectively being
> terminated and should not impede the progress.
>
> This patch solves this problem by checking the 'system_state' value
> to see if we are in heading towards death. We also make the wait
> mechanism a bit more asynchronous.
This seems to be checking the wrong thing conceptually. We should abort
the wait if xenstored is dead not if our domain is dying.
I think you can consider xenstored as dead if:
a) it's local and we're dying.
b) it's remote and the remote domain is dead.
> Fixes-Bug: http://bugs.xenproject.org/xen/bug/8
This bug link has no useful information in it.
> --- a/drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_xs.c
> +++ b/drivers/xen/xenbus/xenbus_xs.c
> @@ -148,9 +148,24 @@ static void *read_reply(enum xsd_sockmsg_type *type, unsigned int *len)
>
> while (list_empty(&xs_state.reply_list)) {
> spin_unlock(&xs_state.reply_lock);
> - /* XXX FIXME: Avoid synchronous wait for response here. */
> - wait_event(xs_state.reply_waitq,
> - !list_empty(&xs_state.reply_list));
> + wait_event_timeout(xs_state.reply_waitq,
> + !list_empty(&xs_state.reply_list),
> + msecs_to_jiffies(500));
This is still a synchronous wait. Is the removal of the FIXME comment
correct?
> +
> + /*
> + * If we are in the process of being shut-down there is
> + * no point of trying to contact XenBus - it is either
> + * killed (xenstored application) or the other domain
> + * has been killed or is unreachable.
Not necessarily, xenstore could just be slow.
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-21 17:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-08 17:38 [PATCH] Fixes to Linux v3.13 - bugs.xenproject.org ones. (v1) Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-11-08 17:38 ` [PATCH 1/4] xen/mcfg: Call PHYSDEVOP_pci_mmcfg_reserved for MCFG areas Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-11-21 10:37 ` David Vrabel
2013-11-08 17:38 ` [PATCH 2/4] xen/manage: Poweroff forcefully if user-space is not yet up Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-11-20 21:11 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2013-11-21 11:33 ` David Vrabel
2013-11-26 16:47 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2014-04-01 15:43 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-11-08 17:38 ` [PATCH 3/4] xen/manage: Guard against user-space initiated poweroff and XenBus Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-11-20 21:40 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2013-11-21 11:09 ` David Vrabel
2013-11-26 16:45 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-12-02 11:27 ` David Vrabel
2014-03-31 19:09 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2014-04-01 13:18 ` David Vrabel
2014-04-01 14:03 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-11-08 17:38 ` [PATCH 4/4] xen/xenbus: Avoid synchronous wait on XenBus stalling shutdown/restart Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-11-21 17:52 ` David Vrabel [this message]
2013-11-22 9:30 ` [Xen-devel] " Ian Campbell
2013-11-26 16:50 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-12-02 11:41 ` David Vrabel
2014-03-31 20:33 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2014-04-01 12:53 ` David Vrabel
2014-01-26 1:13 ` Zhang, Yang Z
2014-01-26 3:44 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2014-04-03 11:59 ` [PATCH] Fixes to Linux v3.13 - bugs.xenproject.org ones. (v1) David Vrabel
2014-04-03 18:07 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
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=528E485C.5030906@citrix.com \
--to=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/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
Powered by JetHome