RHBZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1121540
When we try to hot-unplugging a busy virtio-rng device, the device
can't be removed. And the reading process in guest gets stuck.
Those two patches fixed this issue by completing have_data completion
and preventing invalid reading.
Before we really unregister the hwrng device, reading will get stuck if
the virtio device is reset. We should return error for reading when we
start to remove the device.
Signed-off-by: Amos Kong ak...@redhat.com
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
---
drivers/char/hw_random/virtio-rng.c | 5 +
1
When we try to hot-remove a busy virtio-rng device from QEMU monitor,
the device can't be hot-removed. Because virtio-rng driver hangs at
wait_for_completion_killable().
This patch exits the waiting by completing have_data completion before
unregistering, resets data_avail to avoid the hwrng core
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:04:54AM +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
Hi Amos,
On (Tue) 09 Sep 2014 [19:14:02], Amos Kong wrote:
When we try to hot-remove a busy virtio-rng device from QEMU monitor,
the device can't be hot-removed. Because virtio-rng driver hangs at
wait_for_completion_killable().
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:22:12AM +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
On (Tue) 09 Sep 2014 [23:23:07], Amos Kong wrote:
(Resend to fix the subject)
Hi Amit, Rusty
RHBZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127062
steps:
- Read random data by 'dd if=/dev/hwrng of=/dev/null' in guest
On (Wed) 10 Sep 2014 [14:11:36], Amos Kong wrote:
When we try to hot-remove a busy virtio-rng device from QEMU monitor,
the device can't be hot-removed. Because virtio-rng driver hangs at
wait_for_completion_killable().
This patch exits the waiting by completing have_data completion before
On (Wed) 10 Sep 2014 [14:11:37], Amos Kong wrote:
Before we really unregister the hwrng device, reading will get stuck if
the virtio device is reset. We should return error for reading when we
start to remove the device.
Signed-off-by: Amos Kong ak...@redhat.com
Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 02:49:38PM +0800, Amos Kong wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:22:12AM +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
On (Tue) 09 Sep 2014 [23:23:07], Amos Kong wrote:
(Resend to fix the subject)
Hi Amit, Rusty
RHBZ: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1127062
steps:
It doesn't save too much cpu time as expected, just a cleanup.
Signed-off-by: Amos Kong ak...@redhat.com
---
drivers/char/hw_random/core.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c b/drivers/char/hw_random/core.c
index
When I check hwrng attributes in sysfs, cat process always gets
stuck if guest has only 1 vcpu and uses a slow rng backend.
Currently we check if there is any tasks waiting to be run on
current cpu in rng_dev_read() by need_resched(). But need_resched()
doesn't work because rng_dev_read() is
If we read hwrng by long-running dd process, it takes too much cpu time.
When we check hwrng attributes from sysfs by cat, it gets stuck.
The problem can only be reproduced with non-smp guest with slow backend.
This patchset changed hwrng core to always delay 10 jiffies, cat process
have chance
Il 07/09/2014 12:32, Ming Lei ha scritto:
It is a good idea to disable SG merge for vq incapable of indirect because
there are very limited direct descriptors.
I think you mean _enabling_ SG merge if indirect descriptors are not there.
For vq capable of indirect, it should be better to not do
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Paolo Bonzini pbonz...@redhat.com wrote:
Il 07/09/2014 12:32, Ming Lei ha scritto:
It is a good idea to disable SG merge for vq incapable of indirect because
there are very limited direct descriptors.
I think you mean _enabling_ SG merge if indirect
On 09/04/2014 10:57 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
On Thu, Sep 4, 2014 at 7:31 PM, Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au wrote:
Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net writes:
On Sep 2, 2014 11:53 PM, Rusty Russell ru...@rustcorp.com.au wrote:
Andy Lutomirski l...@amacapital.net writes:
There really
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 8:36 AM, Christopher Covington
c...@codeaurora.org wrote:
On 09/04/2014 10:57 PM, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
There's a third option: try to make virtio-mmio work everywhere
(except s390), at least in the long run. This other benefits: it
makes minimal hypervisors simpler,
On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 10:15:57PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Sep 08, 2014 at 11:18:30AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
Could you respond to Ming Lei's mail, who benchmarked the patch, please?
I don't really have any additional data or disagreement, not sure what
I should
Hi all,
Probably won't read mail. Linus, I'll have pull requests early
next week; if there's anything needed I'm sure Michael Tsirkin can
handle it.
Cheers,
Rusty.
PS. England and Italy for a holiday; my daughter chose them (somehow I
forgot to inform her of the existence of Euro
17 matches
Mail list logo
