[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v4 09/13] xen/pvcalls: implement sendmsg
On Fri, 22 Sep 2017, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: > > +static bool pvcalls_front_write_todo(struct sock_mapping *map) > > +{ > > + struct pvcalls_data_intf *intf = map->active.ring; > > + RING_IDX cons, prod, size = XEN_FLEX_RING_SIZE(PVCALLS_RING_ORDER); > > + int32_t error; > > + > > + cons = intf->out_cons; > > + prod = intf->out_prod; > > + error = intf->out_error; > > + if (error == -ENOTCONN) > > + return false; > > + if (error != 0) > > + return true; > > Just like below, error processing can be moved up. OK > > + return !!(size - pvcalls_queued(prod, cons, size)); > > +} > > + > > static irqreturn_t pvcalls_front_event_handler(int irq, void *dev_id) > > { > > struct xenbus_device *dev = dev_id; > > @@ -363,6 +380,108 @@ int pvcalls_front_connect(struct socket *sock, struct > > sockaddr *addr, > > return ret; > > } > > > > +static int __write_ring(struct pvcalls_data_intf *intf, > > + struct pvcalls_data *data, > > + struct iov_iter *msg_iter, > > + int len) > > +{ > > + RING_IDX cons, prod, size, masked_prod, masked_cons; > > + RING_IDX array_size = XEN_FLEX_RING_SIZE(PVCALLS_RING_ORDER); > > + int32_t error; > > + > > + error = intf->out_error; > > + if (error < 0) > > + return error; > > + cons = intf->out_cons; > > + prod = intf->out_prod; > > + /* read indexes before continuing */ > > + virt_mb(); > > + > > + size = pvcalls_queued(prod, cons, array_size); > > + if (size >= array_size) > > + return 0; > > > Is it possible to have size > array_size? Yes, if somebody makes a mistake in writing to prod. Of course, it is not valid. I guess I could return error instead of 0. > > + if (len > array_size - size) > > + len = array_size - size; > > + > > + masked_prod = pvcalls_mask(prod, array_size); > > + masked_cons = pvcalls_mask(cons, array_size); > > + > > + if (masked_prod < masked_cons) { > > + copy_from_iter(data->out + masked_prod, len, msg_iter); > > + } else { > > + if (len > array_size - masked_prod) { > > + copy_from_iter(data->out + masked_prod, > > + array_size - masked_prod, msg_iter); > > + copy_from_iter(data->out, > > + len - (array_size - masked_prod), > > + msg_iter); > > + } else { > > + copy_from_iter(data->out + masked_prod, len, msg_iter); > > + } > > + } > > + /* write to ring before updating pointer */ > > + virt_wmb(); > > + intf->out_prod += len; > > + > > + return len; > > > I know that you said you'd be changing len's type to int but now that I > am looking at it I wonder whether you could pass len as a 'size_t *' and > have this routine return error code (i.e. <=0). > > OTOH, we'd be mixing up types again since RING_IDX is an unsigned int. > > So I'll leave it to you (or anyone else reviewing this) to decide which > way is better. see below > > +} > > + > > +int pvcalls_front_sendmsg(struct socket *sock, struct msghdr *msg, > > + size_t len) > > Also, the signature here looks suspicious --- you are trying to send > 'size_t len' bytes but returning an int, which is how many bytes you've > actually sent. Right? Yes, but it is OK because it is limited by the size of the array which is far smaller than INT_MAX (the array size is 262144). This is also why I would just keep len as int. _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |