|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 33/33] Add Xen virtual block device driver.
|
To: |
Chris Wright <chrisw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [RFC PATCH 33/33] Add Xen virtual block device driver. |
|
From: |
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Date: |
Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:34:06 +0200 |
|
Cc: |
Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx>, Zachary Amsden <zach@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Ian Pratt <ian.pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>, virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Christian Limpach <Christian.Limpach@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Delivery-date: |
Thu, 20 Jul 2006 05:15:05 -0700 |
|
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|
In-reply-to: |
<20060718091958.657332000@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
|
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
|
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
|
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
|
Organization: |
Intel International BV |
|
References: |
<20060718091807.467468000@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <20060718091958.657332000@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 2006-07-18 at 00:00 -0700, Chris Wright wrote:
> plain text document attachment (blkfront)
> The block device frontend driver allows the kernel to access block
> devices exported exported by a virtual machine containing a physical
> block device driver.
Hi,
as first general comment, I think that some of the memory allocation
GFP_ flags are possibly incorrect; I would expect several places to use
GFP_NOIO rather than GFP_KERNEL, to avoid recursion/deadlocks
> +static void blkif_recover(struct blkfront_info *info)
> +{
> + int i;
> + struct blkif_request *req;
> + struct blk_shadow *copy;
> + int j;
> +
> + /* Stage 1: Make a safe copy of the shadow state. */
> + copy = kmalloc(sizeof(info->shadow), GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOFAIL);
like here..
> + memcpy(copy, info->shadow, sizeof(info->shadow));
and __GFP_NOFAIL is usually horrid; is this because error recovery was
an afterthought, or because it's physically impossible? In addition
__GFP_NOFAIL in a block device driver is... an interesting way to add
OOM deadlocks... have the VM guys looked into this yet?
> +#if 1
> +#define IPRINTK(fmt, args...) \
> + printk(KERN_INFO "xen_blk: " fmt, ##args)
> +#else
> +#define IPRINTK(fmt, args...) ((void)0)
> +#endif
hmm isn't this a duplication of the pr_debug() and dev_dbg()
infrastructure? Please don't reinvent new ones..
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
|
|
Home