[lkml]   [2014]   [Dec]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/6] UBI: Fastmap: Fix races in ubi_wl_get_peb()
Am 07.12.2014 um 08:36 schrieb Tanya Brokhman:
> On 12/5/2014 11:08 PM, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>>>>>> spin_unlock(&ubi->wl_lock);
>>>>>> + if (retried) {
>>>>>> + ubi_err(ubi, "Unable to get a free PEB from user WL pool");
>>>>>> + ret = -ENOSPC;
>>>>>> + goto out;
>>>>>> + }
>>>>>> + retried = 1;
>>>>> Why did you decide to retry in this function? and why only 1 retry attempt? I'm not against it, trying to understand the logic.
>>>> Because failing immediately with -ENOSPC is not nice.
>>> Why not? this is what was done before....
>> The behavior from before was not good.
>> If we return here a -ENOSPC it is not because we ran out of free PEBs, it is because the pool contains
>> no free PEBs and needs refilling.
>> As between refilling the pool and requesting a fresh PEB from it another thread could "steal" all PEBs
>> we retry.
>>> I think what I really bothers me in this case is that you don't sleep, you branch immediately to retry again, so the chances that there will be context switch and free pebs appear
>>> aren't that high.
>>> I'm used to functions using some sort of "retry" logic to sleep before retrying. Of course sleeping isn't a good idea here. That's why the "retry" bugs me a bit.
>> You mean a cond_resched()?
>> This retry-logic is common pattern in UBI. For exmaple see ubi_wl_put_peb().
> you're right. didn't pay much attention to ubi_wl_put_peb() before. don't like it there either :)
> perhaps we can rethink this later for both cases.

If there is room for improvement I'm all open for an extra patch set all over UBI. :-)


 \ /
  Last update: 2014-12-07 11:01    [W:0.063 / U:4.392 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site