On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 05:54:28PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote: > > > On 08/29/2017 04:23 AM, David Gibson wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 06:11:18PM -0300, Daniel Henrique Barboza wrote: > > > v2: > > > - rebased with ppc-for-2.11 > > > - function 'spapr_cas_completed' dropped > > > - function 'spapr_drc_needed' made public and it's now used inside > > > 'spapr_hotplugged_dev_before_cas' > > > - 'spapr_drc_needed' was changed to support the migration of logical > > > DRCs with devs attached in UNUSED state > > > - new function: 'spapr_clear_pending_events'. This function is used > > > inside ppc_spapr_reset to reset the pending_events QTAILQ > > Thanks for the followup, unfortunately there is still an important bug > > left, see comments on the patch itself. > > > > At a higher level, though, looking at the event reset code made me > > think of a possible even simpler solution to this problem. > > > > The queue of events (both hotplug and epow) is already in a simple > > internal form that's independent of the two delivery mechanisms. The > > only difference is what event source triggers the interrupt. This > > explains why an extra hotplug event after the CAS "unstuck" the queue. > > > > AFAICT, a spurious interrupts here should be harmless - the kernel > > will just check the queue and find nothing there. > > > > So, it should be sufficient to, after CAS, pulse the hotplug queue > > interrupt if the hotplug queue is negotiated. > > > This is something I've tried in my first attempts at this problem, before > sending the first patch in which I blocked hotplug before CAS. Back then, > the problem was that the kernel panics with sig 11 (acess of bad area) when > receiving the pulse after CAS. Huh. > I've investigated it a bit today and it seems that it still the case. Firing > an IRQ right > after CAS breaks the kernel. In fact, if you time a regular CPU hotplug > right after > CAS you'll get the same sig 11 kernel ooops. It looks like there is a time > window after > CAS that the kernel can't handle the hotplug process and pulsing the hotplug > queue in this window breaks the guest. I've tried some hacks such as pulsing > the queue > in the first 'event_scan' call made by the guest, but apparently it is still > too early. > > I've sent an email to the linuxppc-dev mailing list talking about this > behavior > and asking if there is a reliable way to know when we can safely pulse the > hotplug > queue. Meanwhile, I'll keep working in the v3 respin of this patch in case > this > solution of pulsing the hotplug queue ends up being not feasible. Right. As Ben's reply says that definitely looks like a guest kernel bug. But, it's in enough kernels in the wild that we really need to work around it anyway. I think the reset-at-CAS approach is our best bet to accomplish that at this stage. Note that the clear-queue-at-reset preliminary cleanup will be valuable even if we end up not needing the rest of the reset at CAS stuff. -- 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