Commit f259d9bd authored by Ming Lei's avatar Ming Lei Committed by Christoph Hellwig
Browse files

virtio_scsi: remove ACCESS_ONCE() and smp_read_barrier_depends()



Access to tgt->req_vq is strictly serialized by spin_lock
of tgt->tgt_lock, so the ACCESS_ONCE() isn't necessary.

smp_read_barrier_depends() in virtscsi_req_done was introduced
to order reading req_vq and decreasing tgt->reqs, but it isn't
needed now because req_vq is read from
scsi->req_vqs[vq->index - VIRTIO_SCSI_VQ_BASE] instead of
tgt->req_vq, so remove the unnecessary barrier.

Also remove related comment about the barrier.

Signed-off-by: default avatarMing Lei <tom.leiming@gmail.com>
Acked-by: default avatarPaolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarChristoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
parent 27f344eb
Loading
Loading
Loading
Loading
+6 −47
Original line number Diff line number Diff line
@@ -73,17 +73,12 @@ struct virtio_scsi_vq {
 * queue, and also lets the driver optimize the IRQ affinity for the virtqueues
 * (each virtqueue's affinity is set to the CPU that "owns" the queue).
 *
 * An interesting effect of this policy is that only writes to req_vq need to
 * take the tgt_lock.  Read can be done outside the lock because:
 * tgt_lock is held to serialize reading and writing req_vq. Reading req_vq
 * could be done locklessly, but we do not do it yet.
 *
 * - writes of req_vq only occur when atomic_inc_return(&tgt->reqs) returns 1.
 *   In that case, no other CPU is reading req_vq: even if they were in
 *   virtscsi_queuecommand_multi, they would be spinning on tgt_lock.
 *
 * - reads of req_vq only occur when the target is not idle (reqs != 0).
 *   A CPU that enters virtscsi_queuecommand_multi will not modify req_vq.
 *
 * Similarly, decrements of reqs are never concurrent with writes of req_vq.
 * Decrements of reqs are never concurrent with writes of req_vq: before the
 * decrement reqs will be != 0; after the decrement the virtqueue completion
 * routine will not use the req_vq so it can be changed by a new request.
 * Thus they can happen outside the tgt_lock, provided of course we make reqs
 * an atomic_t.
 */
@@ -238,38 +233,6 @@ static void virtscsi_req_done(struct virtqueue *vq)
	int index = vq->index - VIRTIO_SCSI_VQ_BASE;
	struct virtio_scsi_vq *req_vq = &vscsi->req_vqs[index];

	/*
	 * Read req_vq before decrementing the reqs field in
	 * virtscsi_complete_cmd.
	 *
	 * With barriers:
	 *
	 * 	CPU #0			virtscsi_queuecommand_multi (CPU #1)
	 * 	------------------------------------------------------------
	 * 	lock vq_lock
	 * 	read req_vq
	 * 	read reqs (reqs = 1)
	 * 	write reqs (reqs = 0)
	 * 				increment reqs (reqs = 1)
	 * 				write req_vq
	 *
	 * Possible reordering without barriers:
	 *
	 * 	CPU #0			virtscsi_queuecommand_multi (CPU #1)
	 * 	------------------------------------------------------------
	 * 	lock vq_lock
	 * 	read reqs (reqs = 1)
	 * 	write reqs (reqs = 0)
	 * 				increment reqs (reqs = 1)
	 * 				write req_vq
	 * 	read (wrong) req_vq
	 *
	 * We do not need a full smp_rmb, because req_vq is required to get
	 * to tgt->reqs: tgt is &vscsi->tgt[sc->device->id], where sc is stored
	 * in the virtqueue as the user token.
	 */
	smp_read_barrier_depends();

	virtscsi_vq_done(vscsi, req_vq, virtscsi_complete_cmd);
};

@@ -560,12 +523,8 @@ static struct virtio_scsi_vq *virtscsi_pick_vq(struct virtio_scsi *vscsi,

	spin_lock_irqsave(&tgt->tgt_lock, flags);

	/*
	 * The memory barrier after atomic_inc_return matches
	 * the smp_read_barrier_depends() in virtscsi_req_done.
	 */
	if (atomic_inc_return(&tgt->reqs) > 1)
		vq = ACCESS_ONCE(tgt->req_vq);
		vq = tgt->req_vq;
	else {
		queue_num = smp_processor_id();
		while (unlikely(queue_num >= vscsi->num_queues))