On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 03:13:13PM -0500, Chuck Lever wrote:
>
> > On Nov 8, 2016, at 3:03 PM, J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 29, 2016 at 12:21:03PM -0400, Chuck Lever wrote:
> >> Hi Bruce-
> >
> > Sorry for the slow response!
> >
> > ...
> >> In commit 39a9beab5acb83176e8b9a4f0778749a09341f1f ('rpc: share one xps between
> >> all backchannels') you added:
> >>
> >> diff --git a/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c b/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c
> >> index f5572e3..4f01f63 100644
> >> --- a/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c
> >> +++ b/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c
> >> @@ -136,6 +136,8 @@ static void svc_xprt_free(struct kref *kref)
> >> /* See comment on corresponding get in xs_setup_bc_tcp(): */
> >> if (xprt->xpt_bc_xprt)
> >> xprt_put(xprt->xpt_bc_xprt);
> >> + if (xprt->xpt_bc_xps)
> >> + xprt_switch_put(xprt->xpt_bc_xps);
> >> xprt->xpt_ops->xpo_free(xprt);
> >> module_put(owner);
> >> }
> >>
> >> svc_xprt_free() is invoked by svc_xprt_put(). svc_xprt_put() is called
> >> from svc_rdma in soft IRQ context (eg. svc_rdma_wc_receive).
> >
> > Is that necessary? I wonder why the svcrdma code seems to be taking so
> > many of its own references on svc_xprts.
>
> The idea is to keep the xprt around while Work Requests (I/O) are running,
> so that the xprt is guaranteed to be there during work completions. The
> completion handlers (where svc_xprt_put is often invoked) run in soft IRQ
> context.
>
> It's simple to change completions to use a Work Queue instead, but testing
> so far shows that will result in a performance loss. I'm still studying it.
>
> Is there another way to keep the xprt's ref count boosted while I/O is
> going on?
Why do you need the svc_xprt in the completion?
Can the xpo_detach method wait for any pending completions?
--b.
>
>
> >> However, xprt_switch_put() takes a spin lock (xps_lock) which is locked
> >> everywhere without disabling BHs.
> >>
> >> It looks to me like 39a9beab5acb makes svc_xprt_put() no longer BH-safe?
> >> Not sure if svc_xprt_put() was intended to be BH-safe beforehand.
> >>
> >> Maybe xprt_switch_put() could be invoked in ->xpo_free, but that seems
> >> like a temporary solution.
> >
> > Since xpo_free is also called from svc_xprt_put that doesn't sound like
> > it would change anything. Or do we not trunk over RDMA for some reason?
>
> It's quite desirable to trunk NFS/RDMA on multiple connections, and it
> should work just like it does for TCP, but so far it's not been tested.
>
>
> --
> Chuck Lever
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
