Re: [PATCH 1/2] vsock/virtio: Move rx_buf_nr and rx_buf_max_nr initialization position
From: Luigi Leonardi <hidden>
Date: 2025-02-10 11:02:46
Also in:
kvm, virtualization
Hi Junnan, Ying Thank you for the contribution! A few minor comments on the process: I think this series is missing a cover letter, not all the maintainers have been CCd, and you should add the tag net (because it's a fix) to the subject. (e.g. [PATCH net 1/2]). Here you can find some useful information[1]. [1]https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html On Fri, Feb 07, 2025 at 01:20:32PM +0800, Junnan Wu wrote:
From: Ying Gao <redacted> In function virtio_vsock_probe, it initializes the variables "rx_buf_nr" and "rx_buf_max_nr", but in function virtio_vsock_restore it doesn't. Move the initizalition position into function virtio_vsock_vqs_start. Once executing s2r twice in a row without
I guess "s2r" is "suspend to resume" but is not that clear to me.
initializing rx_buf_nr and rx_buf_max_nr, the rx_buf_max_nr increased to three times vq->num_free, at this time, in function virtio_transport_rx_work, the conditions to fill rx buffer (rx_buf_nr < rx_buf_max_nr / 2) can't be met. Signed-off-by: Ying Gao <redacted> Signed-off-by: Junnan Wu <redacted>
Maybe you need a "Co-Developed-by"?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
--- net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c index b58c3818f284..9eefd0fba92b 100644 --- a/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c +++ b/net/vmw_vsock/virtio_transport.c@@ -688,6 +688,8 @@ static void virtio_vsock_vqs_start(struct virtio_vsock *vsock)mutex_unlock(&vsock->tx_lock); mutex_lock(&vsock->rx_lock); + vsock->rx_buf_nr = 0; + vsock->rx_buf_max_nr = 0; virtio_vsock_rx_fill(vsock); vsock->rx_run = true; mutex_unlock(&vsock->rx_lock);@@ -779,8 +781,6 @@ static int virtio_vsock_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)vsock->vdev = vdev; - vsock->rx_buf_nr = 0; - vsock->rx_buf_max_nr = 0; atomic_set(&vsock->queued_replies, 0); mutex_init(&vsock->tx_lock); -- 2.34.1
Code LGTM. Thank you, Luigi