> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Carpenter [mailto:dan.carpen...@oracle.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 4, 2017 1:48 PM
> To: Long Li <lon...@microsoft.com>
> Cc: KY Srinivasan <k...@microsoft.com>; Haiyang Zhang
> <haiya...@microsoft.com>; de...@linuxdriverproject.org; linux-
> ker...@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Retry infinitely for hypercall
> 
> Fix the subsystem prefix in the subject.
> 
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2017 at 02:39:31PM -0800, Long Li wrote:
> > From: Long Li <lon...@microsoft.com>
> >
> > Hyper-v host guarantees that a hypercall will succeed. Retry infinitely to
> avoid returning transient failures to upper layer.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Long Li <lon...@microsoft.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/hv/connection.c | 17 ++++++++---------
> >  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/hv/connection.c b/drivers/hv/connection.c index
> > 6ce8b87..4bcb099 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hv/connection.c
> > +++ b/drivers/hv/connection.c
> > @@ -439,7 +439,6 @@ int vmbus_post_msg(void *buffer, size_t buflen)  {
> >     union hv_connection_id conn_id;
> >     int ret = 0;
> 
> Btw, when you disable GCC's uninitialized variable checking by storing bogus
> values in "ret", it's eventually going to bite you in the bum.
> Eventually you're going to get a bug that should have been detected through
> static analysis if only you hadn't disabled it.
> 
> > -   int retries = 0;
> >     u32 usec = 1;
> >
> >     conn_id.asu32 = 0;
> > @@ -447,10 +446,10 @@ int vmbus_post_msg(void *buffer, size_t buflen)
> >
> >     /*
> >      * hv_post_message() can have transient failures because of
> > -    * insufficient resources. Retry the operation a couple of
> > -    * times before giving up.
> > +    * insufficient resources. We retry infinitely on these failures
> > +    * because host guarantees hypercall will eventually succeed.
> >      */
> > -   while (retries < 20) {
> > +   while (1) {
> >             ret = hv_post_message(conn_id, 1, buffer, buflen);
> >
> >             switch (ret) {
> > @@ -459,11 +458,11 @@ int vmbus_post_msg(void *buffer, size_t buflen)
> >                      * We could get this if we send messages too
> >                      * frequently.
> >                      */
> 
> Move the comment above the code it's commenting about.
> 
>               /*
>                * We could get INVALID_CONNECTION_ID if we flood the
>                * host with too many messages.
>                */
>               case HV_STATUS_INVALID_CONNECTION_ID:
>               case HV_STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_MEMORY:
>               case HV_STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFERS:
>                       break;
> 
> 
> 
> > -                   ret = -EAGAIN;
> > -                   break;
> >             case HV_STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_MEMORY:
> >             case HV_STATUS_INSUFFICIENT_BUFFERS:
> > -                   ret = -ENOMEM;
> > +                   /*
> > +                    * Temporary failure out of resources
> > +                    */
> >                     break;
> >             case HV_STATUS_SUCCESS:
> >                     return ret;
> 
>                       return 0;
> 
> Better to be more explicit.  When I looked at this I got briefly confused if 
> this
> function was supposed to return HV_ statuses or standard kernel error
> codes.  It turns out that HV_STATUS_SUCCESS is zero the success returns
> map directly to linux kernel code for success but it's clearer to be explicit.
> 
> > @@ -472,12 +471,12 @@ int vmbus_post_msg(void *buffer, size_t buflen)
> >                     return -EINVAL;
> >             }
> 
> > -           retries++;
> >             udelay(usec);
> >             if (usec < 2048)
> >                     usec *= 2;
> >     }
> > -   return ret;
> > +   /* Impossible to get here */
> > +   BUG_ON(1);
> 
> Remove the comment and the BUG_ON().
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter

Thanks, I will fix those in V2.

Long

Reply via email to