Re: [Xen-devel] DomU's network interface will hung when Dom0 running 32bit

[jianhai luan <jianhai.luan@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 2013-10-16 0:03, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:19:42PM +0800, jianhai luan wrote:
> [...]
> > > > > > * time_after_eq(now, next_credit) -> false
> > > > > > * time_before(now, expires) -> false
> > > > > If now is placed in above environment, the result will be correct
> > > > > (Sending package will be not allowed until next_credit).
> > > > No, it is not necessarily correct. Keep in mind that "now" wraps around,
> > > > which is the issue you try to fix. You still have a window to stall your
> > > > frontend.
> > > Remember that time_after_eq is supposed to work even with wraparound
> > > occurring, so long as the two times are less than MAX_LONG/2 apart.
> > Sorry for my misunderstand explanation. I mean that
> >    * time_after_eq()/time_before_eq() fix the jiffies wraparound, so
> > please think about  jiffies in line increasing.
> >    * time_after_eq()/time_before_eq() have the range (0, MAX_LONG/2),
> > the judge will be wrong if out of the range.
> >
> > So please think about three kind environment
> >    -  expires        now        next_credit
> >       --------time increases this direction ---------->
> >
> >    -  expires        [next_credit        now next_credit+MAX_LONG/2
> >       --------time increase this direction ----------->
> >
> >    - expires        next_credit        next_credit+MAX_LONG/2 now
> >       --------time increadse this direction ---------->
> >
> > The first environment should be netfront consume all credit_byte
> > before next_credit, So we should pending one timer to calculator the
> > new credit_byte, and don't transmit until next_credit.
> >
> > the second environment should be calculator the credit_byte because
> > netfront don't consume all credit_byte before next_credit, and
> > time_after_eq() do correct judge.
> >
> > the third environment should be calculator in time because netfront
> > don't consume all credit_byte until next_credit.But time_after_eq do
> > error judge (time_after_eq(now, next_credit) is false), so the
> > remaining_byte isn't be increased.
> >
> > and I work on the third environment.  You know now >
> > next_credit+MAX_LONG/2, time_before(now, expire) should be
> > true(time_before(now, expire) is false in first environment)
> Thanks for staighten this out for me. I'm just too dumb for this, please
> be patient with me. :-)
>
> Could you prove that time_before(now, expire) is always true in third
> case? That's where my main cencern lies. Is it because msecs_to_jiffies
> always returns MAX_JIFFY_OFFSET (which is ((LONG_MAX >> 1)-1) ) at most?
I have wrong judge in third environment. If now large than expires + 
MAX_UNLONG, time_before(now, expires) will be false.
  expires    next_credit    next_credit+MAX_UNLONG/2    expires + 
MAX_UNLONG    now    next_credit+MAX_UNLONG
  --------------------------------------------------------- time 
increadse this direction  ---------------------------------->
  In the above environment, time_before(now, expires) will return 
false. But the jiffies elapsed more time and next_credit will be 
reachable in soon(time_after_eq(now, next_credit) will be true).
> Wei.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel