RE: [RFC PATCH v12 00/17] dlb: introduce DLB device driver
flat view
From: Chen, Mike Ximing <hidden>
Date: 2021-12-22 04:37:37
Also in:
lkml
-----Original Message----- From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2021 4:41 AM To: Chen, Mike Ximing <redacted> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; arnd@arndb.de; gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; Williams, Dan J [off-list ref]; pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com; netdev@vger.kernel.org; davem@davemloft.net; kuba@kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v12 00/17] dlb: introduce DLB device driverquoted
1. Before a scheduling domain is created/enabled, a set of parameters are passed to the kernel driver via configfs attribute files in an configfs domain directory (say $domain) created by user. Each attribute file corresponds to a configuration parameter of the domain. After writing to all the attribute files, user writes 1 to "create" attribute, which triggers an action (i.e., domain creation) in the kernel driver. Since multiple processes/users can access the $domain directory, multiple users can write to the attribute files at the same time. How do we guarantee an atomic update/configuration of a domain? In other words, if user A wants to set attributes 1 and 2, how can we prevent user B from changing attribute 1 and 2 before user A writes 1 to "create"? A configfs directory with individual attribute files seems to not be able to provide atomic configuration in this case. One option to solve this issue could be write a structured data (with a set of parameters) to a single attribute file. This would guarantee the atomic configuration, but may notbe a conventional configfs operation. How about throw away configfs and use netlink? Messages are atomic, and you can add an arbitrary number of attributes to a single netlink message. It will also make your code more network like, since nothing else in the network stack uses configfs, as far as i know.
Hi Andrew, As I explained in my other response, DLB is not a network accelerator and DLB driver is not a part of network stack. We would obviously prefer to resolve the atomic update and resource reset at tear-down Issues within the configfs framework if possible. But I will take a look at the netlink implementations. Thanks for the suggestion Mike