Re: [PATCH 2/4] xen/blkfront: cleanup stale persistent grants
From: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@citrix.com>
Date: 2018-08-06 16:16:53
Also in:
lkml
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 01:34:01PM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Add a periodic cleanup function to remove old persistent grants which are no longer in use on the backend side. This avoids starvation in case there are lots of persistent grants for a device which no longer is involved in I/O business. Signed-off-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com> --- drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c | 99 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 95 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)diff --git a/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c b/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c index b5cedccb5d7d..19feb8835fc4 100644 --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkfront.c@@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ #include <linux/scatterlist.h> #include <linux/bitmap.h> #include <linux/list.h> +#include <linux/workqueue.h> #include <xen/xen.h> #include <xen/xenbus.h>@@ -121,6 +122,9 @@ static inline struct blkif_req *blkif_req(struct request *rq) static DEFINE_MUTEX(blkfront_mutex); static const struct block_device_operations xlvbd_block_fops; +static struct delayed_work blkfront_work; +static LIST_HEAD(info_list); +static bool blkfront_work_active; /* * Maximum number of segments in indirect requests, the actual value used by@@ -216,6 +220,7 @@ struct blkfront_info /* Save uncomplete reqs and bios for migration. */ struct list_head requests; struct bio_list bio_list; + struct list_head info_list; }; static unsigned int nr_minors;@@ -1764,6 +1769,12 @@ static int write_per_ring_nodes(struct xenbus_transaction xbt, return err; } +static void free_info(struct blkfront_info *info) +{ + list_del(&info->info_list); + kfree(info); +} + /* Common code used when first setting up, and when resuming. */ static int talk_to_blkback(struct xenbus_device *dev, struct blkfront_info *info)@@ -1885,7 +1896,10 @@ static int talk_to_blkback(struct xenbus_device *dev, destroy_blkring: blkif_free(info, 0); - kfree(info); + mutex_lock(&blkfront_mutex); + free_info(info); + mutex_unlock(&blkfront_mutex); + dev_set_drvdata(&dev->dev, NULL); return err;@@ -1996,6 +2010,10 @@ static int blkfront_probe(struct xenbus_device *dev, info->handle = simple_strtoul(strrchr(dev->nodename, '/')+1, NULL, 0); dev_set_drvdata(&dev->dev, info); + mutex_lock(&blkfront_mutex); + list_add(&info->info_list, &info_list); + mutex_unlock(&blkfront_mutex); + return 0; }@@ -2306,6 +2324,15 @@ static void blkfront_gather_backend_features(struct blkfront_info *info) if (indirect_segments <= BLKIF_MAX_SEGMENTS_PER_REQUEST) indirect_segments = 0; info->max_indirect_segments = indirect_segments; + + if (info->feature_persistent) { + mutex_lock(&blkfront_mutex); + if (!blkfront_work_active) { + blkfront_work_active = true; + schedule_delayed_work(&blkfront_work, HZ * 10);
Does it make sense to provide a module parameter to rune the schedule of the cleanup routine?
+ } + mutex_unlock(&blkfront_mutex);
Is it really necessary to have the blkfront_work_active boolean? What happens if you queue the same delayed work more than once? Thanks, Roger.