From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To: linmiaohe <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
Cc: <cohuck@redhat.com>, <eric.auger@redhat.com>, <aik@ozlabs.ru>,
<mpe@ellerman.id.au>, <bhelgaas@google.com>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
<hexin.op@gmail.com>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VFIO: PCI: eliminate unnecessary overhead in vfio_pci_reflck_find
Date: Tue, 5 Nov 2019 12:24:36 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191105122436.5bd5282f@x1.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1572433030-6267-1-git-send-email-linmiaohe@huawei.com>
On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 18:57:10 +0800
linmiaohe <linmiaohe@huawei.com> wrote:
> From: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
>
> The driver of the pci device may not equal to vfio_pci_driver,
> but we fetch vfio_device from pci_dev unconditionally in func
> vfio_pci_reflck_find. This overhead, such as the competition
> of vfio.group_lock, can be eliminated by check pci_dev_driver
> with vfio_pci_driver first.
>
> Signed-off-by: Miaohe Lin <linmiaohe@huawei.com>
> ---
> drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci.c | 9 ++++-----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci.c
> index 379a02c36e37..1e21970543a6 100644
> --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci.c
> +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci.c
> @@ -1466,15 +1466,14 @@ static int vfio_pci_reflck_find(struct pci_dev *pdev, void *data)
> struct vfio_device *device;
> struct vfio_pci_device *vdev;
>
> - device = vfio_device_get_from_dev(&pdev->dev);
> - if (!device)
> - return 0;
> -
> if (pci_dev_driver(pdev) != &vfio_pci_driver) {
> - vfio_device_put(device);
> return 0;
> }
>
> + device = vfio_device_get_from_dev(&pdev->dev);
> + if (!device)
> + return 0;
> +
> vdev = vfio_device_data(device);
>
> if (vdev->reflck) {
I believe this introduces a race. When we hold a reference to the vfio
device, an unbind from a vfio bus driver will be blocked in
vfio_del_group_dev(). Therefore if we test the driver is vfio-pci
while holding this reference, we know that it cannot be released and
the device_data is a valid vfio_pci_device. Testing the driver prior
to acquiring a vfio device reference is meaningless as we have no
guarantee that the driver has not changed by the time we acquire a
reference. Are you actually seeing contention here or was this a code
inspection optimization? Thanks,
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-05 19:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-30 10:57 [PATCH] VFIO: PCI: eliminate unnecessary overhead in vfio_pci_reflck_find linmiaohe
2019-11-05 19:24 ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2019-11-06 2:02 linmiaohe
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191105122436.5bd5282f@x1.home \
--to=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=aik@ozlabs.ru \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
--cc=hexin.op@gmail.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linmiaohe@huawei.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).