On Mon, 20 Mar 2023 at 12:09, Leon Romanovsky <leon@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:53:23AM +0000, Nuno Gonçalves wrote:
> > The remap of fill and completion rings was frowned upon as they
> > control the usage of UMEM which does not support concurrent use.
> > At the same time this would disallow the remap of this rings
> > into another process.
> >
> > A possible use case is that the user wants to transfer the socket/
> > UMEM ownerwhip to another process (via SYS_pidfd_getfd) and so
nit: ownership
> > would need to also remap this rings.
> >
> > This will have no impact on current usages and just relaxes the
> > remap limitation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Nuno Gonçalves <nunog@xxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > net/xdp/xsk.c | 9 ++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/xdp/xsk.c b/net/xdp/xsk.c
> > index 2ac58b282b5eb..2af4ff64b22bd 100644
> > --- a/net/xdp/xsk.c
> > +++ b/net/xdp/xsk.c
> > @@ -1300,10 +1300,11 @@ static int xsk_mmap(struct file *file, struct socket *sock,
> > {
> > loff_t offset = (loff_t)vma->vm_pgoff << PAGE_SHIFT;
> > unsigned long size = vma->vm_end - vma->vm_start;
> > + int state = READ_ONCE(xs->state);
Reverse Christmas Tree notation here please. Move it one line down to
after the *xs declaration.
> > struct xdp_sock *xs = xdp_sk(sock->sk);
> > struct xsk_queue *q = NULL;
> >
> > - if (READ_ONCE(xs->state) != XSK_READY)
> > + if (!(state == XSK_READY || state == XSK_BOUND))
>
> This if(..) is actually:
> if (state != XSK_READY && state != XSK_BOUND)
Nuno had it like that to start with when he sent the patch privately
to me, but I responded that I prefered the current one. It is easier
to understand if read out aloud IMO. Do not have any strong feelings
either way since the statements are equivalent.
> Thanks
