From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Oberparleiter <oberpar@linux.ibm.com>,
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>,
Vineeth Vijayan <vneethv@linux.ibm.com>,
"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>,
Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@nvidia.com>,
Tarun Gupta <targupta@nvidia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/13] vfio/ccw: Convert to use vfio_register_group_dev()
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 2021 14:31:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210430143140.378904bf.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210429181347.GA3414759@nvidia.com>
On Thu, 29 Apr 2021 15:13:47 -0300
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 01:58:55PM +0200, Cornelia Huck wrote:
>
> > > This seems like one of these cases where using the mdev GUID API
> > > was not a great fit. The ccs_driver should have just directly
> > > created a vfio_device and not gone into the mdev guid lifecycle
> > > world.
> >
> > I don't remember much of the discussion back then, but I don't think
> > the explicit generation of devices was the part we needed, but rather
> > some other kind of mediation -- probably iommu related, as subchannels
> > don't have that concept on their own. Anyway, too late to change now.
>
> The mdev part does three significant things:
> - Provide a lifecycle model based on sysfs and the GUIDs
> - Hackily inject itself into the VFIO IOMMU code as a special case
> - Force the creation of a unique iommu group as the group FD is
> mandatory to get the device FD.
>
> This is why PASID is such a mess for mdev because it requires even
> more special hacky stuff to link up the dummy IOMMU but still operate
> within the iommu group of the parent device.
>
> I can see an alternative arrangement using the /dev/ioasid idea that
> is a lot less hacky and does not force the mdev guid lifecycle on
> everyone that wants to create vfio_device.
I have not followed that discussion -- do you have a summary or a
pointer?
>
> > > I almost did this, but couldn't figure out how the lifetime of the
> > > ccs_driver callbacks are working relative to the lifetime of the mdev
> > > device since they also reach into these structs. Maybe they can't be
> > > called for some css related reason?
> >
> > Moving allocations to the mdev driver probe makes sense, I guess. We
> > should also move enabling the subchannel to that point in time (I don't
> > remember why we enable it in the css probe function, and can't think of
> > a good reason for that; obviously needs to be paired with quiescing and
> > disabling the subchannel in the mdev driver remove function); that
> > leaves the uevent dance (which can hopefully also be removed, if some
> > discussed changes are implemented in the common I/O layer) and fencing
> > QDIO.
> >
> > Regarding the other callbacks,
> > - vfio_ccw_sch_irq should not be invoked if the subchannel is not
> > enabled; maybe log a message before returning for !private.
> > - vfio_ccw_sch_remove should be able to return 0 for !private (nothing
> > to quiesce, if the subchannel is not enabled).
> > - vfio_ccw_sch_shutdown has nothing to do for !private (same reason.)
> > - In vfio_ccw_sch_event, we should either skip the fsm_event and the
> > state change for !private, or return 0 in that case.
> > - vfio_ccw_chp_event already checks for !private. Not sure whether we
> > should try to update some control blocks and return -ENODEV if the
> > subchannel is not operational, but it's probably not needed.
>
> All the checks for !private need some kind of locking. The driver core
> model is that the 'struct device_driver' callbacks are all called
> under the device_lock (this prevents the driver unbinding during the
> callback). I didn't check if ccs does this or not..
probe/remove/shutdown are basically a forward of the callbacks at the
bus level. The css bus should make sure that we serialize
irq/sch_event/chp_event with probe/remove.
>
> So if we NULL drvdata under the device_lock everything can be
> quite simple here.
>
> Jason
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-30 12:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-26 20:00 [PATCH v2 00/13] Remove vfio_mdev.c, mdev_parent_ops and more Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 01/13] vfio/mdev: Remove CONFIG_VFIO_MDEV_DEVICE Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-27 11:05 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 02/13] vfio/mdev: Allow the mdev_parent_ops to specify the device driver to bind Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-27 12:32 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-04-27 23:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-28 6:03 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-28 7:56 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-28 12:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-28 14:00 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-28 19:58 ` Dan Williams
2021-04-28 23:38 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-29 0:00 ` Dave Jiang
2021-05-26 0:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-26 1:42 ` Dan Williams
2021-05-27 11:44 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-27 14:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-27 15:13 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-29 6:51 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-04 9:36 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-04 11:30 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-28 6:44 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-28 14:14 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-28 14:24 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 03/13] vfio/mtty: Convert to use vfio_register_group_dev() Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 04/13] vfio/mdpy: " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 05/13] vfio/mbochs: " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 07/13] vfio/ccw: " Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-27 20:06 ` Eric Farman
2021-04-27 22:10 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-28 12:55 ` Eric Farman
2021-04-28 13:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-28 17:09 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-04-28 17:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-29 11:58 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-04-29 18:13 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-30 12:31 ` Cornelia Huck [this message]
2021-04-30 17:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-03 10:54 ` s390 common I/O layer locking (was: [PATCH v2 07/13] vfio/ccw: Convert to use vfio_register_group_dev()) Cornelia Huck
2021-05-04 15:10 ` s390 common I/O layer locking Vineeth Vijayan
2021-07-24 13:24 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-08-03 14:27 ` Vineeth Vijayan
2021-08-10 15:00 ` Cornelia Huck
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 09/13] vfio/mdev: Remove vfio_mdev.c Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-28 6:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-28 6:36 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-04-28 12:53 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-29 6:53 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-29 6:56 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2021-05-03 17:32 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-05-04 9:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-05-04 16:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 10/13] vfio/mdev: Remove mdev_parent_ops dev_attr_groups Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 11/13] vfio/mdev: Remove mdev_parent_ops Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 12/13] vfio/mdev: Use the driver core to create the 'remove' file Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-26 20:00 ` [PATCH v2 13/13] vfio/mdev: Remove mdev drvdata Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-27 21:30 ` [PATCH v2 00/13] Remove vfio_mdev.c, mdev_parent_ops and more Alex Williamson
2021-04-27 22:20 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-04-27 22:49 ` Alex Williamson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210430143140.378904bf.cohuck@redhat.com \
--to=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=daniel@ffwll.ch \
--cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=leonro@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mgurtovoy@nvidia.com \
--cc=oberpar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=targupta@nvidia.com \
--cc=vneethv@linux.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).