On Fri, 2018-01-12 at 08:23 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 07:07:06PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 21:00 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 04:02:33PM +0000, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 08:22 +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> > > > > The proposed patch definitely decreases the chance of races, but it is not fixing them.
> > > > > There is a chance to have change in qp state immediately after your "if ..." check.
> > > >
> > > > Hello Leon,
> > > >
> > > > Please have a look at rxe_qp_error() and you will see that the patch I posted
> > > > is a proper fix. In the scenario you described rxe_qp_error() will trigger a
> > > > run of rxe_completer().
> > >
> > > Bart,
> > >
> > > What am I missing?
> > >
> > > CPU1 CPU2
> > > if (unlikely....
> > > <---
> > > /* move the qp to the error state */
> > > void rxe_qp_error(struct rxe_qp *qp)
> > > {
> > > qp->req.state = QP_STATE_ERROR;
> > > qp->resp.state = QP_STATE_ERROR;
> > > qp->attr.qp_state = IB_QPS_ERR;
> > > --->
> > > rxe_run_task(&qp->req.task, must_sched);
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > It is more or less the same as without "if (unlikely..."
> >
> > Hello Leon,
> >
> > In the above the part of rxe_qp_error() that I was referring to in my e-mail
> > is missing:
> >
> > if (qp_type(qp) == IB_QPT_RC)
> > rxe_run_task(&qp->comp.task, 1);
>
>
> But it is exactly where race exists, as long QP isn't protected, it can
> switch CPUs and create race.
Hello Leon,
Can you clarify which race you are referring to? rxe_run_task() uses the
tasklet mechanism and tasklets are guaranteed to run on at most one CPU at a
time. See also the "Top and Bottom Halves" chapter in Linux Device Drivers,
3rd edition. See also the tasklet_schedule() implementation in
<linux/interrupt.h> and in kernel/softirq.c.
Thanks,
Bart.��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���fk��ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
