similar to: [PATCH 00/18] virtiofs: Fix various races and cleanups round 1

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:48:56PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > This object is used both by fuse_connection as well virt device. So make > this object reference counted and that makes it easy to define life cycle > of the object. > > Now deivce can be removed while filesystem is still mounted. This will > cleanup all the virtqueues but virtio_fs object will still be around and

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:48:56PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > This object is used both by fuse_connection as well virt device. So make > this object reference counted and that makes it easy to define life cycle > of the object. > > Now deivce can be removed while filesystem is still mounted. This will > cleanup all the virtqueues but virtio_fs object will still be around and

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:48:57PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > It is possible that a mount is in progress and device is being removed at > the same time. Use virtio_fs_mutex to avoid races. > > This also takes care of bunch of races and removes some TODO items. > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> > --- > fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 32

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:48:57PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > It is possible that a mount is in progress and device is being removed at > the same time. Use virtio_fs_mutex to avoid races. > > This also takes care of bunch of races and removes some TODO items. > > Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> > --- > fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 32

Hi Miklos, Here are few small cleanups for virtiofs for 5.5. I had received some comments from Michael Tsirkin on original virtiofs patches and these cleanups are result of these comments. Thanks Vivek Vivek Goyal (3): virtiofs: Use a common function to send forget virtiofs: Do not send forget request "struct list_head" element virtiofs: Use completions while waiting for queue

Hi, We have couple of places which can result in deadlock. This patch series fixes these. We can be called with fc->bg_lock (for background requests) while submitting a request. This leads to two constraints. - We can't end requests in submitter's context and call fuse_end_request() as it tries to take fc->bg_lock as well. So queue these requests on a list and use a worker to

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:15:15PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 09:55:49AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > [..] > > What's with all of the TODOs? Some of these are really scary, > > looks like they need to be figured out before this is merged. > > Hi Michael, > > One of the issue I noticed is races w.r.t device removal and super >

On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 01:42:02PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> > > Add a basic file system module for virtio-fs. This does not yet contain > shared data support between host and guest or metadata coherency speedups. > However it is already significantly faster than virtio-9p. > > Design Overview > ===============

On Tue, Sep 03, 2019 at 01:42:02PM +0200, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > From: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha at redhat.com> > > Add a basic file system module for virtio-fs. This does not yet contain > shared data support between host and guest or metadata coherency speedups. > However it is already significantly faster than virtio-9p. > > Design Overview > ===============

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:48:55PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > diff --git a/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h b/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h > index 85e2dcad68c1..04e2c000d63f 100644 > --- a/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h > +++ b/fs/fuse/fuse_i.h > @@ -479,6 +479,11 @@ struct fuse_iqueue_ops { > */ > void (*wake_pending_and_unlock)(struct fuse_iqueue *fiq) > __releases(fiq->waitq.lock); > + > + /**

When the Virtio queue is full, a work item is scheduled to execute in 1ms that retries adding the request to the queue. This is a large amount of time on the scale on which a virtio-fs device can operate. When using a DPU this is around 40us baseline without going to a remote server (4k, QD=1). This patch queues requests when the Virtio queue is full, and when a completed request is taken off,

On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 04:49:39PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 10:34:15PM +0200, Peter-Jan Gootzen wrote: > > On 31/05/2023 21:18, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 07:10:32PM +0200, Peter-Jan Gootzen wrote: > > >> When the Virtio queue is full, a work item is scheduled > > >> to execute in 1ms that retries adding the

When the Virtio queue is full, a work item is scheduled to execute in 1ms that retries adding the request to the queue. This is a large amount of time on the scale on which a virtio-fs device can operate. When using a DPU this is around 40us baseline without going to a remote server (4k, QD=1). This patch queues requests when the Virtio queue is full, and when a completed request is taken off,

On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 01:03:09PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:48:56PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > This object is used both by fuse_connection as well virt device. So make > > this object reference counted and that makes it easy to define life cycle > > of the object. > > > > Now deivce can be removed while filesystem is still

On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 01:05:34PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:48:57PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > It is possible that a mount is in progress and device is being removed at > > the same time. Use virtio_fs_mutex to avoid races. > > > > This also takes care of bunch of races and removes some TODO items. > > > > Signed-off-by:

On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 10:34:15PM +0200, Peter-Jan Gootzen wrote: > On 31/05/2023 21:18, Vivek Goyal wrote: > > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 07:10:32PM +0200, Peter-Jan Gootzen wrote: > >> When the Virtio queue is full, a work item is scheduled > >> to execute in 1ms that retries adding the request to the queue. > >> This is a large amount of time on the scale on

On 01/06/2023 16:08, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 04:49:39PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: >> On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 10:34:15PM +0200, Peter-Jan Gootzen wrote: >>> On 31/05/2023 21:18, Vivek Goyal wrote: >>>> On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 07:10:32PM +0200, Peter-Jan Gootzen wrote: >>>>> When the Virtio queue is full, a work item is scheduled

It is possible that a mount is in progress and device is being removed at the same time. Use virtio_fs_mutex to avoid races. This also takes care of bunch of races and removes some TODO items. Signed-off-by: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal at redhat.com> --- fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:48:49PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > +static void virtio_fs_drain_queue(struct virtio_fs_vq *fsvq) > +{ > + WARN_ON(fsvq->in_flight < 0); > + > + /* Wait for in flight requests to finish.*/ > + while (1) { > + spin_lock(&fsvq->lock); > + if (!fsvq->in_flight) { > + spin_unlock(&fsvq->lock); > + break; > + }

On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 03:48:49PM -0400, Vivek Goyal wrote: > +static void virtio_fs_drain_queue(struct virtio_fs_vq *fsvq) > +{ > + WARN_ON(fsvq->in_flight < 0); > + > + /* Wait for in flight requests to finish.*/ > + while (1) { > + spin_lock(&fsvq->lock); > + if (!fsvq->in_flight) { > + spin_unlock(&fsvq->lock); > + break; > + }