mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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

  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