On Wed, Dec 14, 2022 at 11:58:47AM +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
On Tue, 2022-12-13 at 19:28 +0000, Bobby Eshleman wrote:diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c index 5703775af129..2a5994b029b2 100644 --- a/drivers/vhost/vsock.c +++ b/drivers/vhost/vsock.c @@ -51,8 +51,7 @@ struct vhost_vsock { struct hlist_node hash; struct vhost_work send_pkt_work; - spinlock_t send_pkt_list_lock; - struct list_head send_pkt_list; /* host->guest pending packets */ + struct sk_buff_head send_pkt_queue; /* host->guest pending packets */ atomic_t queued_replies; @@ -108,40 +107,33 @@ vhost_transport_do_send_pkt(struct vhost_vsock *vsock, vhost_disable_notify(&vsock->dev, vq); do { - struct virtio_vsock_pkt *pkt; + struct virtio_vsock_hdr *hdr; + size_t iov_len, payload_len; struct iov_iter iov_iter; + u32 flags_to_restore = 0; + struct sk_buff *skb; unsigned out, in; size_t nbytes; - size_t iov_len, payload_len; int head; - u32 flags_to_restore = 0; - spin_lock_bh(&vsock->send_pkt_list_lock); - if (list_empty(&vsock->send_pkt_list)) { - spin_unlock_bh(&vsock->send_pkt_list_lock); + spin_lock(&vsock->send_pkt_queue.lock); + skb = __skb_dequeue(&vsock->send_pkt_queue); + spin_unlock(&vsock->send_pkt_queue.lock);Here you use a plain spin_lock(), but every other lock has the _bh() variant. A few lines above this functions acquires a mutex, so this is process context (and not BH context): I guess you should use _bh() here, too.
Maybe we can use directly the new virtio_vsock_skb_dequeue(). IIRC we added it exactly to use the same kind of lock everywhere. Thanks, Stefano _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
