From: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
Jared Rossi <jrossi@linux.ibm.com>,
linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] vfio-ccw: Fix interrupt handling for HALT/CLEAR
Date: Mon, 18 May 2020 18:01:09 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cb87469c-84ad-933a-3473-afa9b009c499@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200515203759.4ffc6f31.pasic@linux.ibm.com>
On 5/15/20 2:37 PM, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Fri, 15 May 2020 14:12:05 -0400
> Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>>>>> Also why do we see the scenario you describe in the wild? I agree that
>>>>> this should be taken care of in the kernel as well, but according to my
>>>>> understanding QEMU is already supposed to reject the second SSCH (CPU 2)
>>>>> with cc 2 because it sees that FC clear function is set. Or?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe for virtio, but for vfio this all gets passed through to the
>>>> kernel who makes that distinction. And as I've mentioned above, that's
>>>> not happening.
>>>
>>> Let's have a look at the following qemu functions. AFAIK it is
>>> common to vfio and virtio, or? Will prefix my inline
>>
>> My mistake, I didn't look far enough up the callchain in my quick look
>> at the code.
>>
>> ...snip...
>>
>
> No problem. I'm glad I was at least little helpful.
>
>>>
>>> So unless somebody (e.g. the kernel vfio-ccw) nukes the FC bits qemu
>>> should prevent the second SSCH from your example getting to the kernel,
>>> or?
>>
>> It's not so much something "nukes the FC bits" ... but rather that that
>> the data in the irb_area of the io_region is going to reflect what the
>> subchannel told us for the interrupt.
>
> This is why the word composition came into my mind. If the HW subchannel
> has FC clear, but QEMU subchannel does not the way things compose (or
> superpose) is fishy.
>
>>
>> Hrm... If something is polling on TSCH instead of waiting for a tap on
>> the shoulder, that's gonna act weird too. Maybe the bits need to be in
>> io_region.irb_area proper, rather than this weird private->scsw space.
>
> Do we agree that the scenario you described with that diagram should not
> have hit kernel in the first place, because if things were correct QEMU
> should have fenced the second SSCH?
>
> I think you do, but want to be sure. If not, then we need to meditate
> some more on this.
I think I do too. :) I'll meditate on this a bit later, because...
>
> I do tend to think that the kernel part is not supposed to rely on
> userspace playing nice.
...this is important, and I'd rather get the kernel buttoned up first
before sorting out QEMU.
Especially when it comes to integrity and
> correctness. I can't tell just yet if this is something we must
> or just can catch in the kernel module. I'm for catching it regardless,
> but I'm even more for everything working as it is supposed. :)
>
> Regards,
> Halil
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-05-18 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-05-13 14:29 [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] vfio-ccw: Fix interrupt handling for HALT/CLEAR Eric Farman
2020-05-13 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/4] vfio-ccw: Do not reset FSM state for unsolicited interrupts Eric Farman
2020-05-13 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/4] vfio-ccw: Utilize scsw actl to serialize start operations Eric Farman
2020-05-13 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/4] vfio-ccw: Expand SCSW usage to HALT and CLEAR Eric Farman
2020-05-13 14:29 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/4] vfio-ccw: Clean up how to react to a failed START Eric Farman
2020-05-14 13:46 ` [RFC PATCH v2 0/4] vfio-ccw: Fix interrupt handling for HALT/CLEAR Halil Pasic
2020-05-15 13:09 ` Eric Farman
2020-05-15 14:55 ` Halil Pasic
2020-05-15 15:58 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-05-15 17:41 ` Halil Pasic
2020-05-15 18:19 ` Eric Farman
2020-05-15 18:12 ` Eric Farman
2020-05-15 18:37 ` Halil Pasic
2020-05-18 22:01 ` Eric Farman [this message]
2020-05-15 19:35 ` Halil Pasic
2020-05-18 16:09 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-05-18 21:57 ` Eric Farman
2020-05-19 11:23 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-05-18 22:09 ` Halil Pasic
2020-05-19 11:36 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-05-19 12:10 ` Halil Pasic
2020-05-26 9:55 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-05-26 11:08 ` Eric Farman
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=cb87469c-84ad-933a-3473-afa9b009c499@linux.ibm.com \
--to=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=jrossi@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pasic@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).