On Wed, Oct 23, 2019 at 06:36:13PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2019/10/23 下午6:13, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 09:32:36AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > On 2019/10/22 上午12:31, Simon Horman wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 05:55:33PM +0800, Zhu, Lingshan wrote: > > > > > On 10/16/2019 5:53 PM, Simon Horman wrote: > > > > > > Hi Zhu, > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks for your patch. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 09:10:40AM +0800, Zhu Lingshan wrote: > > > > ... > > > > > > > > > > > +static void ifcvf_read_dev_config(struct ifcvf_hw *hw, u64 offset, > > > > > > > + void *dst, int length) > > > > > > > +{ > > > > > > > + int i; > > > > > > > + u8 *p; > > > > > > > + u8 old_gen, new_gen; > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + do { > > > > > > > + old_gen = ioread8(&hw->common_cfg->config_generation); > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + p = dst; > > > > > > > + for (i = 0; i < length; i++) > > > > > > > + *p++ = ioread8((u8 *)hw->dev_cfg + offset + i); > > > > > > > + > > > > > > > + new_gen = ioread8(&hw->common_cfg->config_generation); > > > > > > > + } while (old_gen != new_gen); > > > > > > Would it be wise to limit the number of iterations of the loop above? > > > > > Thanks but I don't quite get it. This is used to make sure the function > > > > > would get the latest config. > > > > I am worried about the possibility that it will loop forever. > > > > Could that happen? > > > > > > > > ... > > > My understanding is that the function here is similar to virtio config > > > generation [1]. So this can only happen for a buggy hardware. > > Ok, so this circles back to my original question. > > Should we put a bound on the number of times the loop runs > > or should we accept that the kernel locks up if the HW is buggy? > > > > I'm not sure, and similar logic has been used by virtio-pci drivers for > years. Consider this logic is pretty simple and it should not be the only > place that virito hardware can lock kernel, we can keep it as is. Ok, I accept that there isn't much use fixing this if its idomatic and there are other places virtio hardware can lock up the kernel. > Actually, there's no need for hardware to implement generation logic, it > could be emulated by software or even ignored. In new version of > virtio-mdev, get_generation() is optional, when it was not implemented, 0 is > simply returned by virtio-mdev transport. > > Thanks >