From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> To: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>, Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.ibm.com>, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>, Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov@linux.ibm.com>, Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>, Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>, Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>, Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>, Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/12] virtio/s390: DMA support for virtio-ccw Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 17:47:55 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20190409174755.5f62d04e.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190409152313.0296e8f1@oc2783563651> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 15:23:13 +0200 Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 15:01:20 +0200 > Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:29:27 +0200 > > Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 11:57:43 +0200 > > > Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 01:16:12 +0200 > > > > Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > @@ -1255,6 +1254,18 @@ static int virtio_ccw_online(struct ccw_device *cdev) > > > > > ret = -ENOMEM; > > > > > goto out_free; > > > > > } > > > > > + vcdev->vdev.dev.parent = &cdev->dev; > > > > > > > > That one makes sense, pci and mmio are doing that as well. > > > > > > > > > + cdev->dev.dma_mask = &vcdev->dma_mask; > > > > > > > > That one feels a bit weird. Will this change in one of the follow-on > > > > patches? (Have not yet looked at the whole series.) > > > > > > I don't thinks so. Do you mean this should happen within the cio code? > > > I think I started out with the idea to keep the scope as narrow as > > > possible. Do you have any suggestions? > > > > From what I see, you set the mask from the virtio-ccw side, then > > propagate it up to the general ccw_device, and then the generic virtio > > code will fetch it from the ccw_device. > > Right! For some reason dma_mask is a pointer. And I need virtio core to > use a sane value for virtio_ccw devices. > > > Don't you potentially need > > something for other ccw_devices in that protected hipervisor case as > > well (e.g for 3270)? > > > Maybe, maybe not. The first stage is likely to be virito only. I would > prefer sorting out stuff like 3270 as the need arises. Also see my > response to patch 4 (Message-Id: <20190409141114.7dcce94a@oc2783563651>). As long as the infrastructure is flexible enough to be extended later, ok. I still need to read that mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > + ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&cdev->dev, > > > > > DMA_BIT_MASK(64)); > > > > > + if (ret) > > > > > + ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&cdev->dev, > > > > > + > > > > > DMA_BIT_MASK(32)); > > > > > + if (ret) { > > > > > + dev_warn(&cdev->dev, "Failed to enable 64-bit > > > > > or 32-bit DMA. Trying to continue, but this might not > > > > > work.\n"); > > > > > > > > This does not look like you'd try to continue? > > > > > > > > > > I remember now. First I did continue, then I changed this to fail > > > hard so I can not ignore any such problems while smoke testing ('I > > > don't always check the kernel messages'), but kept the old message. > > > This basically should not fail anyway, otherwise we have a problem > > > AFAIU. > > > > > > By the way virtio-pci tries to continue indeed, and this is also > > > where the wording comes from ;). > > > > > > What would you prefer? Try to continue or fail right away? > > > > If it does not have a chance of working properly in the general case, > > I'd fail. > > > > Agreed! I will make it so. Would dropping ' Trying to continue, but > this might not work.' from the warning message work for you? Sounds fine. > > I could also drop the attempt to set a 32 bit mask if you agree. Do you? Only if you also drop it from the message as well ;) Not sure in what cases you'll fail to set a 64 bit mask, but succeed with a 32 bit mask. If there's no sensible situation where that might happen, I'd just go ahead and drop it.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> To: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> Cc: Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>, Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@linux.ibm.com>, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Sebastian Ott <sebott@linux.ibm.com>, Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>, Viktor Mihajlovski <mihajlov@linux.ibm.com>, Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/12] virtio/s390: DMA support for virtio-ccw Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2019 17:47:55 +0200 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20190409174755.5f62d04e.cohuck@redhat.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20190409152313.0296e8f1@oc2783563651> On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 15:23:13 +0200 Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 15:01:20 +0200 > Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 13:29:27 +0200 > > Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > On Tue, 9 Apr 2019 11:57:43 +0200 > > > Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, 5 Apr 2019 01:16:12 +0200 > > > > Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > @@ -1255,6 +1254,18 @@ static int virtio_ccw_online(struct ccw_device *cdev) > > > > > ret = -ENOMEM; > > > > > goto out_free; > > > > > } > > > > > + vcdev->vdev.dev.parent = &cdev->dev; > > > > > > > > That one makes sense, pci and mmio are doing that as well. > > > > > > > > > + cdev->dev.dma_mask = &vcdev->dma_mask; > > > > > > > > That one feels a bit weird. Will this change in one of the follow-on > > > > patches? (Have not yet looked at the whole series.) > > > > > > I don't thinks so. Do you mean this should happen within the cio code? > > > I think I started out with the idea to keep the scope as narrow as > > > possible. Do you have any suggestions? > > > > From what I see, you set the mask from the virtio-ccw side, then > > propagate it up to the general ccw_device, and then the generic virtio > > code will fetch it from the ccw_device. > > Right! For some reason dma_mask is a pointer. And I need virtio core to > use a sane value for virtio_ccw devices. > > > Don't you potentially need > > something for other ccw_devices in that protected hipervisor case as > > well (e.g for 3270)? > > > Maybe, maybe not. The first stage is likely to be virito only. I would > prefer sorting out stuff like 3270 as the need arises. Also see my > response to patch 4 (Message-Id: <20190409141114.7dcce94a@oc2783563651>). As long as the infrastructure is flexible enough to be extended later, ok. I still need to read that mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > + > > > > > + ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&cdev->dev, > > > > > DMA_BIT_MASK(64)); > > > > > + if (ret) > > > > > + ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&cdev->dev, > > > > > + > > > > > DMA_BIT_MASK(32)); > > > > > + if (ret) { > > > > > + dev_warn(&cdev->dev, "Failed to enable 64-bit > > > > > or 32-bit DMA. Trying to continue, but this might not > > > > > work.\n"); > > > > > > > > This does not look like you'd try to continue? > > > > > > > > > > I remember now. First I did continue, then I changed this to fail > > > hard so I can not ignore any such problems while smoke testing ('I > > > don't always check the kernel messages'), but kept the old message. > > > This basically should not fail anyway, otherwise we have a problem > > > AFAIU. > > > > > > By the way virtio-pci tries to continue indeed, and this is also > > > where the wording comes from ;). > > > > > > What would you prefer? Try to continue or fail right away? > > > > If it does not have a chance of working properly in the general case, > > I'd fail. > > > > Agreed! I will make it so. Would dropping ' Trying to continue, but > this might not work.' from the warning message work for you? Sounds fine. > > I could also drop the attempt to set a 32 bit mask if you agree. Do you? Only if you also drop it from the message as well ;) Not sure in what cases you'll fail to set a 64 bit mask, but succeed with a 32 bit mask. If there's no sensible situation where that might happen, I'd just go ahead and drop it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-09 15:47 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2019-04-04 23:16 [RFC PATCH 00/12] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 01/12] virtio/s390: use vring_create_virtqueue Halil Pasic 2019-04-08 11:01 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-08 11:01 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-08 12:37 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 2019-04-08 12:37 ` Michael S. Tsirkin 2019-04-08 13:20 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 02/12] virtio/s390: DMA support for virtio-ccw Halil Pasic 2019-04-09 9:57 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 9:57 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 11:29 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-09 13:01 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 13:01 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 13:23 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-09 15:47 ` Cornelia Huck [this message] 2019-04-09 15:47 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 03/12] s390/mm: force swiotlb for protected virtualization Halil Pasic 2019-04-09 10:16 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 10:16 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 10:54 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-09 17:18 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 17:18 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 12:22 ` Christoph Hellwig 2019-04-09 12:22 ` Christoph Hellwig 2019-04-09 12:39 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 04/12] s390/cio: introduce cio DMA pool Halil Pasic 2019-04-09 10:44 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 10:44 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 12:11 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-09 17:14 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 17:14 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 15:31 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-10 16:07 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 16:07 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 16:52 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-11 18:25 ` Sebastian Ott 2019-04-11 18:25 ` Sebastian Ott 2019-04-12 11:20 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-12 12:12 ` Sebastian Ott 2019-04-12 12:12 ` Sebastian Ott 2019-04-12 15:30 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-16 12:50 ` Sebastian Ott 2019-04-16 12:50 ` Sebastian Ott 2019-04-16 13:31 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 05/12] s390/cio: add protected virtualization support to cio Halil Pasic 2019-04-09 17:55 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-09 17:55 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 0:10 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-10 8:25 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 8:25 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 13:02 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-10 16:16 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 16:16 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-11 14:15 ` Sebastian Ott 2019-04-11 14:15 ` Sebastian Ott 2019-04-12 11:29 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 06/12] s390/airq: use DMA memory for adapter interrupts Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 07/12] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for ccw I/O Halil Pasic 2019-04-10 8:42 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 8:42 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 14:42 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-10 16:21 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 16:21 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 08/12] virtio/s390: add indirection to indicators access Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 09/12] virtio/s390: use DMA memory for notifiers Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 10/12] virtio/s390: consolidate DMA allocations Halil Pasic 2019-04-10 8:46 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 8:46 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 15:12 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-10 16:36 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 16:36 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 17:48 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-11 9:24 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-11 9:24 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-11 10:10 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 11/12] virtio/s390: use the cio DMA pool Halil Pasic 2019-04-04 23:16 ` [RFC PATCH 12/12] virtio/s390: make airq summary indicators DMA Halil Pasic 2019-04-10 9:20 ` [RFC PATCH 00/12] s390: virtio: support protected virtualization Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 9:20 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 15:57 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-10 16:24 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-10 16:24 ` Cornelia Huck 2019-04-12 13:47 ` David Hildenbrand 2019-04-12 13:47 ` David Hildenbrand 2019-04-16 11:10 ` Halil Pasic 2019-04-16 11:50 ` David Hildenbrand 2019-04-16 11:50 ` David Hildenbrand
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=20190409174755.5f62d04e.cohuck@redhat.com \ --to=cohuck@redhat.com \ --cc=alifm@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \ --cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=frankja@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=imbrenda@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=mihajlov@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \ --cc=sebott@linux.ibm.com \ --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.