> -----Original Message-----
> From: KY Srinivasan
> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 6:59 AM
> > diff --git a/drivers/hv/hv_fcopy.c b/drivers/hv/hv_fcopy.c index
> > 23b2ce2..177122a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hv/hv_fcopy.c
> > +++ b/drivers/hv/hv_fcopy.c
> > @@ -86,6 +86,15 @@ static void fcopy_work_func(struct work_struct
> > *dummy)
> > * process the pending transaction.
> > */
> > fcopy_respond_to_host(HV_E_FAIL);
> > +
> > +/* In the case the user-space daemon crashes, hangs or is killed, we
> > + * need to down the semaphore, otherwise, after the daemon starts
> > next
> > + * time, the obsolete data in fcopy_transaction.message or
> > + * fcopy_transaction.fcopy_msg will be used immediately.
> > + */
> > +if (down_trylock(&fcopy_transaction.read_sema))
> > +pr_debug("FCP: failed to acquire the semaphore\n");
> > +
> > }
>
> When the daemon is killed, we currently reset the state in the release
> function. Why can't we cleanup the semaphore state (initialize) here as well.
>
> K. Y
Hi KY,
1) The down_trylock() here is necessary: the daemon can fail to respond in 5
seconds due to many reasons, e.g., the VM's CPU and I/O are too busy. In this
case, the daemon may become running later(NOTE: in this example, the daemon
is not killed), but from the host user's point of view, the PowerShell
copy-vmfile command has failed, so here we have to 'down' the semaphore
anyway, otherwise, the daemon can get obsolete data.
2) If we add a line
sema_init(&fcopy_transaction.read_sema, 0);
in fcopy_release(), it seems OK at a glance, but we have to handle the race
condition: the above down_trylock() and the sema_init() can, in theory, run
simultaneously on different virtual CPUs. It's tricky to address this.
3) So I think we can reuse the same semaphore without an actually unnecessary
re-initialization. :-)
Thanks,
-- Dexuan
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
