lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 6/6] drivers: enable xenwatch multithreading for xen-netback and xen-blkback driver
On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 11:16:30AM +0200, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 14/09/18 09:34, Dongli Zhang wrote:
> > This is the 6th patch of a (6-patch) patch set.
> >
> > As the 'use_mtwatch' for xen-netback and xen-blkback are set to true,
> > probing any xenbus devices of those two drivers would create the per-domU
> > xenwatch thread for the domid the new devices belong to, or increment the
> > reference count of existing thread.
> >
> > Xenwatch multithreading might be enabled for more xen backend pv drivers in
> > the future.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Dongli Zhang <dongli.zhang@oracle.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c | 3 ++-
> > drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c | 1 +
> > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c
> > index a4bc74e..debbbd0 100644
> > --- a/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c
> > +++ b/drivers/block/xen-blkback/xenbus.c
> > @@ -1108,7 +1108,8 @@ static struct xenbus_driver xen_blkbk_driver = {
> > .ids = xen_blkbk_ids,
> > .probe = xen_blkbk_probe,
> > .remove = xen_blkbk_remove,
> > - .otherend_changed = frontend_changed
> > + .otherend_changed = frontend_changed,
> > + .use_mtwatch = true,
> > };
> >
> > int xen_blkif_xenbus_init(void)
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c b/drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c
> > index cd51492..63d46a7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/xenbus.c
> > @@ -1203,6 +1203,7 @@ static struct xenbus_driver netback_driver = {
> > .remove = netback_remove,
> > .uevent = netback_uevent,
> > .otherend_changed = frontend_changed,
> > + .use_mtwatch = true,
>
> Is there a special reason why kernel based backends shouldn't all use
> the multithread model? This would avoid the need for the use_mtwatch
> struct member.
>
> This is meant as an honest question. I'm really not sure we should
> switch all backends at once. OTOH I can't see any real downsides.
>
> Thoughts?

I don't see any downside.

Wei.

>
>
> Juergen

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-14 11:40    [W:0.062 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site