[PATCH v17 2/2] nvmet: support reservation feature
Dmitry Bogdanov
d.bogdanov at yadro.com
Wed Oct 23 06:30:33 PDT 2024
On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 03:06:10PM +0800, Guixin Liu wrote:
> 在 2024/10/22 21:18, Sagi Grimberg 写道:
> > > +static void nvmet_execute_pr_acquire(struct nvmet_req *req)
> > > +{
> > > + u32 cdw10 = le32_to_cpu(req->cmd->common.cdw10);
> > > + bool ignore_key = nvmet_pr_parse_ignore_key(cdw10);
> > > + /* Reservation type, bit 15:08 */
> > > + u8 rtype = (u8)((cdw10 >> 8) & 0xff);
> > > + /* Reservation acquire action, bit 02:00 */
> > > + u8 acquire_act = cdw10 & 0x07;
> > > + struct nvmet_ctrl *ctrl = req->sq->ctrl;
> > > + struct nvmet_pr_acquire_data *d = NULL;
> > > + struct nvmet_pr *pr = &req->ns->pr;
> > > + struct nvmet_pr_registrant *reg;
> > > + u16 status = NVME_SC_SUCCESS;
> > > +
> > > + if (ignore_key ||
> > > + rtype < NVME_PR_WRITE_EXCLUSIVE ||
> > > + rtype > NVME_PR_EXCLUSIVE_ACCESS_ALL_REGS) {
> > > + status = NVME_SC_INVALID_FIELD | NVME_STATUS_DNR;
> > > + goto out;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + d = kmalloc(sizeof(*d), GFP_KERNEL);
> > > + if (!d) {
> > > + status = NVME_SC_INTERNAL;
> > > + goto out;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + status = nvmet_copy_from_sgl(req, 0, d, sizeof(*d));
> > > + if (status)
> > > + goto free_data;
> > > +
> > > + status = NVME_SC_RESERVATION_CONFLICT | NVME_STATUS_DNR;
> > > + mutex_lock(&pr->pr_lock);
> > > + list_for_each_entry_rcu(reg, &pr->registrant_list, entry,
> > > + lockdep_is_held(&pr->pr_lock)) {
> > > + if (uuid_equal(®->hostid, &ctrl->hostid) &&
> > > + reg->rkey == le64_to_cpu(d->crkey)) {
> > > + status = __nvmet_execute_pr_acquire(req, reg,
> > > + acquire_act, rtype, d);
> > > + break;
> > > + }
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (!status && acquire_act ==
> > > NVME_PR_ACQUIRE_ACT_PREEMPT_AND_ABORT) {
> > > + kfree(d);
> > > + INIT_WORK(&req->r.abort_work, nvmet_pr_do_abort);
> > > + queue_work(nvmet_wq, &req->r.abort_work);
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> >
> > Is there a reason why you queue this here and not inside
> > __nvmet_execute_pr_acquire
> > like before?
> >
> Because I should add a "if" branch here to prevent unlock the pr_lock
> and complete
>
> the request. Instead of twice "if", I merge them to one, just let
> __nvmet_execute_pr_acquire()
>
> return status.
>
> > > +
> > > + mutex_unlock(&pr->pr_lock);
> >
> > Hmm... you keep this mutex taken and release it from the work element
> > async... Not a
> > great practice...
> >
> > Any easy way you see to avoid this?
>
> Sure, this is not a greate practice, I will think deeply and find
> another way.
>
Guixin, please, take a look whether keeping that mutex locked during
aborting is actually needed or not. Probably there is no such need -
pr_lock protects ns.pr.registrants_list which is not touched in abort
procedure.
BR,
Dmitry
More information about the Linux-nvme
mailing list