kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc: Shaokun Zhang <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>,
	Nianyao Tang <tangnianyao@huawei.com>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Subject: Re: Question on guest enable msi fail when using GICv4/4.1
Date: Mon, 10 May 2021 10:29:47 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <69cd5989-f4cb-469c-f6a0-3362540e0271@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <871rafowp2.wl-maz@kernel.org>

Hi Marc,

On 5/10/21 9:49 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> Hi Eric,
> On Sun, 09 May 2021 18:00:04 +0100,
> Auger Eric <eric.auger@redhat.com> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 5/7/21 1:02 PM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>> On Fri, 07 May 2021 10:58:23 +0100,
>>> Shaokun Zhang <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Marc,
>>>> Thanks for your quick reply.
>>>> On 2021/5/7 17:03, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 07 May 2021 06:57:04 +0100,
>>>>> Shaokun Zhang <zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com> wrote:
>>>>>> [This letter comes from Nianyao Tang]
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> Using GICv4/4.1 and msi capability, guest vf driver requires 3
>>>>>> vectors and enable msi, will lead to guest stuck.
>>>>> Stuck how?
>>>> Guest serial does not response anymore and guest network shutdown.
>>>>>> Qemu gets number of interrupts from Multiple Message Capable field
>>>>>> set by guest. This field is aligned to a power of 2(if a function
>>>>>> requires 3 vectors, it initializes it to 2).
>>>>> So I guess this is a MultiMSI device with 4 vectors, right?
>>>> Yes, it can support maximum of 32 msi interrupts, and vf driver only use 3 msi.
>>>>>> However, guest driver just sends 3 mapi-cmd to vits and 3 ite
>>>>>> entries is recorded in host.  Vfio initializes msi interrupts using
>>>>>> the number of interrupts 4 provide by qemu.  When it comes to the
>>>>>> 4th msi without ite in vits, in irq_bypass_register_producer,
>>>>>> producer and consumer will __connect fail, due to find_ite fail, and
>>>>>> do not resume guest.
>>>>> Let me rephrase this to check that I understand it:
>>>>> - The device has 4 vectors
>>>>> - The guest only create mappings for 3 of them
>>>>> - VFIO calls kvm_vgic_v4_set_forwarding() for each vector
>>>>> - KVM doesn't have a mapping for the 4th vector and returns an error
>>>>> - VFIO disable this 4th vector
>>>>> Is that correct? If yes, I don't understand why that impacts the guest
>>>>> at all. From what I can see, vfio_msi_set_vector_signal() just prints
>>>>> a message on the console and carries on.
>>>> function calls:
>>>> --> vfio_msi_set_vector_signal
>>>>    --> irq_bypass_register_producer
>>>>       -->__connect
>>>> in __connect, add_producer finally calls kvm_vgic_v4_set_forwarding
>>>> and fails to get the 4th mapping. When add_producer fail, it does
>>>> not call cons->start, calls kvm_arch_irq_bypass_start and then
>>>> kvm_arm_resume_guest.
>>> [+Eric, who wrote the irq_bypass infrastructure.]
>>> Ah, so the guest is actually paused, not in a livelock situation
>>> (which is how I interpreted "stuck").
>>> I think we should handle this case gracefully, as there should be no
>>> expectation that the guest will be using this interrupt. Given that
>>> VFIO seems to be pretty unfazed when a producer fails, I'm temped to
>>> do the same thing and restart the guest.
>>> Also, __disconnect doesn't care about errors, so why should __connect
>>> have this odd behaviour?
>> _disconnect() does not care as we should always succeed tearing off
>> things. del_* ops are void functions. On the opposite we can fail
>> setting up the bypass.
>> Effectively
>> a979a6aa009f ("irqbypass: do not start cons/prod when failed connect")
>> needs to be reverted.
>> I agree the kerneldoc comments in linux/irqbypass.h may be improved to
>> better explain the role of stop/start cbs and warn about their potential
>> global impact.
> Yup. It also begs the question of why we have producer callbacks, as
> nobody seems to use them.

At the time this was designed, I was working on VFIO platform IRQ
forwarding using direct EOI and they were used (and useful)

+	irq->producer.stop = vfio_platform_irq_bypass_stop;
+	irq->producer.start = vfio_platform_irq_bypass_start;

[PATCH v4 02/13] VFIO: platform: registration of a dummy IRQ bypass producer
[PATCH v4 07/13] VFIO: platform: add irq bypass producer management

basically the IRQ was disabled and re-enabled. This series has never
been upstreamed but that's where it originates from.

>> wrt the case above, "in __connect, add_producer finally calls
>> kvm_vgic_v4_set_forwarding and fails to get the 4th mapping", shouldn't
>> we succeed in that case?
> From a KVM perspective, we can't return a success because there is no
> guest LPI that matches the input signal.
right, sorry I had in mind the set_forwarding was partially successful
for 3 of 4 LPIs but it is a unitary operation.
> And such failure seems to be expected by the VFIO code, which just
> prints a message on the console and set the producer token to NULL. So
> returning an error from the KVM code is useful, at least to an extent.

OK. So with the revert, the use case resume working, right?


> Thanks,
> 	M.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-05-10  8:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-05-07  5:57 Question on guest enable msi fail when using GICv4/4.1 Shaokun Zhang
2021-05-07  9:03 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-07  9:58   ` Shaokun Zhang
2021-05-07 11:02     ` Marc Zyngier
     [not found]       ` <874kfepht4.wl-maz@kernel.org>
2021-05-08  1:51         ` Jason Wang
2021-05-08  6:56           ` Zhu, Lingshan
2021-05-08  9:15           ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-09 17:00       ` Auger Eric
2021-05-10  7:49         ` Marc Zyngier
2021-05-10  8:29           ` Auger Eric [this message]
2021-05-10  9:59             ` Marc Zyngier

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:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=69cd5989-f4cb-469c-f6a0-3362540e0271@redhat.com \
    --to=eric.auger@redhat.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kvmarm@lists.cs.columbia.edu \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=tangnianyao@huawei.com \
    --cc=zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com \


* 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).