[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net v2 1/3] xen-netback: move NAPI add/remove calls
On 11/08/14 13:49, Zoltan Kiss wrote: > On 11/08/14 13:35, David Vrabel wrote: >> On 08/08/14 17:37, Wei Liu wrote: >>> Originally napi_add was in init_queue and napi_del was in deinit_queue, >>> while kthreads were handled in _connect and _disconnect. Move napi_add >>> and napi_remove to _connect and _disconnect so that they reside togother >>> with kthread operations. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> Cc: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c | 12 ++++++++---- >>> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c >>> b/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c >>> index 48a55cd..fdb4fca 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c >>> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c >>> @@ -528,9 +528,6 @@ int xenvif_init_queue(struct xenvif_queue *queue) >>> >>> init_timer(&queue->rx_stalled); >>> >>> - netif_napi_add(queue->vif->dev, &queue->napi, xenvif_poll, >>> - XENVIF_NAPI_WEIGHT); >>> - >>> return 0; >>> } >>> >>> @@ -618,6 +615,9 @@ int xenvif_connect(struct xenvif_queue *queue, >>> unsigned long tx_ring_ref, >>> wake_up_process(queue->task); >>> wake_up_process(queue->dealloc_task); >>> >>> + netif_napi_add(queue->vif->dev, &queue->napi, xenvif_poll, >>> + XENVIF_NAPI_WEIGHT); >>> + >>> return 0; >>> >>> err_rx_unbind: >>> @@ -675,6 +675,11 @@ void xenvif_disconnect(struct xenvif *vif) >>> >>> for (queue_index = 0; queue_index < num_queues; ++queue_index) { >>> queue = &vif->queues[queue_index]; >>> + netif_napi_del(&queue->napi); >>> + } >> >> Why have you added an additional loop over all the queues? The ordering >> looks wrong as well. I think you want >> >> 1. unbind from irqhandler >> 2. napi del >> 3. stop task >> 4. stop dealloc task >> 5. unmap frontend rings. > And that's how they are ordered. No, it isn't. Did you mistakenly look at netfront which is correctly ordered already? You must unbind the irq handler before calling netif_napi_del() or an interrupt may occur and the handler may call napi_schedule() with a deleted instance. David _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |