qemu-devel.nongnu.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>
To: Daniel Henrique Barboza <danielhb413@gmail.com>
Cc: armbru@redhat.com, qemu-ppc@nongnu.org, qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
	groug@kaod.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] DEVICE_NOT_DELETED/DEVICE_UNPLUG_ERROR QAPI events
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2021 12:32:47 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YFvoP20SkpTrp6pQ@yekko.fritz.box> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ba20de28-d65b-6da4-5bff-92b637cf7a56@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3994 bytes --]

On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 04:09:59PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/23/21 10:40 PM, David Gibson wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 23, 2021 at 02:10:22PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On 3/22/21 10:12 PM, David Gibson wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 05:07:36PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > This series adds 2 new QAPI events, DEVICE_NOT_DELETED and
> > > > > DEVICE_UNPLUG_ERROR. They were (and are still being) discussed in [1].
> > > > > 
> > > > > Patches 1 and 3 are independent of the ppc patches and can be applied
> > > > > separately. Patches 2 and 4 are based on David's ppc-for-6.0 branch and
> > > > > are dependent on the QAPI patches.
> > > > 
> > > > Implementation looks fine, but I think there's a bit more to discuss
> > > > before we can apply.
> > > > 
> > > > I think it would make sense to re-order this and put UNPLUG_ERROR
> > > > first.  Its semantics are clearer, and I think there's a stronger case
> > > > for it.
> > > 
> > > Alright
> > > 
> > > > 
> > > > I'm a bit less sold on DEVICE_NOT_DELETED, after consideration.  Does
> > > > it really tell the user/management anything useful beyond what
> > > > receiving neither a DEVICE_DELETED nor a DEVICE_UNPLUG_ERROR does?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > It informs that the hotunplug operation exceed the timeout that QEMU
> > > internals considers adequate, but QEMU can't assert that it was caused
> > > by an error or an unexpected delay. The end result is that the device
> > > is not going to be deleted from QMP, so DEVICE_NOT_DELETED.
> > 
> > Is it, though?  I mean, it is with this implementation for papr:
> > because we clear the unplug_requested flag, even if the guest later
> > tries to complete the unplug, it will fail.
> > 
> > But if I understand what Markus was saying correctly, that might not
> > be possible for all hotplug systems.  I believe Markus was suggesting
> > that DEVICE_NOT_DELETED could just mean that we haven't deleted the
> > device yet, but it could still happen later.
> > 
> > And in that case, I'm not yet sold on the value of a message that
> > essentially just means "Ayup, still dunno what's happening, sorry".
> > 
> > > Perhaps we should just be straightforward and create a DEVICE_UNPLUG_TIMEOUT
> > > event.
> > 
> > Hm... what if we added a "reason" field to UNPLUG_ERROR.  That could
> > be "guest rejected hotplug", or something more specific, in the rare
> > case that the guest has a way of signalling something more specific,
> > or "timeout" - but the later *only* to be sent in cases where on the
> > timeout we're able to block any later completion of the unplug (as we
> > can on papr).
> 
> I believe that's already covered by the existing API:
> 
> 
> +# @DEVICE_UNPLUG_ERROR:
> +#
> +# Emitted when a device hot unplug error occurs.
> +#
> +# @device: device name
> +#
> +# @msg: Informative message

Oh, sorry, I missed that

> The 'informative message' would be the reason the event occurred. In patch
> 4/4, for the memory hotunplug refused by the guest, it is being set as:
> 
>      qapi_error = g_strdup_printf("Memory hotunplug rejected by the guest "
>                                   "for device %s", dev->id);
>      qapi_event_send_device_unplug_error(dev->id, qapi_error);
> 
> 
> 
> We could use the same DEVICE_UNPLUG_ERROR event in the CPU hotunplug timeout
> case (currently on patch 2/4) by just changing 'msg', e.g.:
> 
> 
>      qapi_error = g_strdup_printf("CPU hotunplug timeout for device %s", dev->id);
>      qapi_event_send_device_unplug_error(dev->id, qapi_error);

I think that makes sense for the cases on papr.  Less sure about the
cases Markus has mentioned.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2021-03-25  1:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-12 20:07 [PATCH 0/4] DEVICE_NOT_DELETED/DEVICE_UNPLUG_ERROR QAPI events Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-12 20:07 ` [PATCH 1/4] qapi/qdev.json: add DEVICE_NOT_DELETED event Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-23 18:00   ` Eric Blake
2021-03-23 18:12     ` Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-12 20:07 ` [PATCH 2/4] spapr_drc.c: send DEVICE_NOT_DELETED event on unplug timeout Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-12 20:07 ` [PATCH 3/4] qapi/machine.json: add DEVICE_UNPLUG_ERROR QAPI event Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-12 20:07 ` [PATCH 4/4] spapr.c: use DEVICE_UNPLUG_ERROR event in spapr_memory_unplug_rollback() Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-23  1:12 ` [PATCH 0/4] DEVICE_NOT_DELETED/DEVICE_UNPLUG_ERROR QAPI events David Gibson
2021-03-23 17:10   ` Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-24  1:40     ` David Gibson
2021-03-24 19:09       ` Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-03-25  1:32         ` David Gibson [this message]
2021-03-29 23:28         ` Igor Mammedov
2021-03-30 23:46           ` David Gibson
2021-03-31  9:49             ` Igor Mammedov
2021-04-01  1:31               ` David Gibson
2021-03-31 19:47             ` Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-04-01  1:36               ` David Gibson
2021-03-31 19:40           ` Daniel Henrique Barboza
2021-04-20 17:11 ` Daniel Henrique Barboza

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=YFvoP20SkpTrp6pQ@yekko.fritz.box \
    --to=david@gibson.dropbear.id.au \
    --cc=armbru@redhat.com \
    --cc=danielhb413@gmail.com \
    --cc=groug@kaod.org \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=qemu-ppc@nongnu.org \
    /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).