linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lu Baolu <baolu.lu@linux.intel.com>
To: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>, "Tian, Kevin" <kevin.tian@intel.com>
Cc: baolu.lu@linux.intel.com, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	"Raj, Ashok" <ashok.raj@intel.com>,
	"Jiang, Dave" <dave.jiang@intel.com>,
	"Dey, Megha" <megha.dey@intel.com>,
	"dwmw2@infradead.org" <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
	"alex.williamson@redhat.com" <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
	"bhelgaas@google.com" <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	"dmaengine@vger.kernel.org" <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>,
	"eric.auger@redhat.com" <eric.auger@redhat.com>,
	"Pan, Jacob jun" <jacob.jun.pan@intel.com>,
	"kvm@vger.kernel.org" <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	"kwankhede@nvidia.com" <kwankhede@nvidia.com>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	"maz@kernel.org" <maz@kernel.org>,
	"Hossain, Mona" <mona.hossain@intel.com>,
	"netanelg@mellanox.com" <netanelg@mellanox.com>,
	"parav@mellanox.com" <parav@mellanox.com>,
	"pbonzini@redhat.com" <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	"rafael@kernel.org" <rafael@kernel.org>,
	"Ortiz, Samuel" <samuel.ortiz@intel.com>,
	"Kumar, Sanjay K" <sanjay.k.kumar@intel.com>,
	"shahafs@mellanox.com" <shahafs@mellanox.com>,
	"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	"vkoul@kernel.org" <vkoul@kernel.org>,
	"yan.y.zhao@linux.intel.com" <yan.y.zhao@linux.intel.com>,
	"Liu, Yi L" <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/1] platform-msi: Add platform check for subdevice irq domain
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 13:17:11 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <dfda8933-566c-1ec7-4ed4-427f094cb7c9@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210107071616.GA31158@unreal>

Hi,

On 1/7/21 3:16 PM, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 06:55:16AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>> From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2021 2:09 PM
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 02:04:29AM +0000, Tian, Kevin wrote:
>>>>> From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, January 7, 2021 12:02 AM
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 11:23:39AM -0400, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 06, 2021 at 12:40:17PM +0200, Leon Romanovsky wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I asked what will you do when QEMU will gain needed functionality?
>>>>>>> Will you remove QEMU from this list? If yes, how such "new" kernel
>>> will
>>>>>>> work on old QEMU versions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The needed functionality is some VMM hypercall, so presumably new
>>>>>> kernels that support calling this hypercall will be able to discover
>>>>>> if the VMM hypercall exists and if so superceed this entire check.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's not speculate, do we have well-known path?
>>>>> Will such patch be taken to stable@/distros?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There are two functions introduced in this patch. One is to detect whether
>>>> running on bare metal or in a virtual machine. The other is for deciding
>>>> whether the platform supports ims. Currently the two are identical because
>>>> ims is supported only on bare metal at current stage. In the future it will
>>> look
>>>> like below when ims can be enabled in a VM:
>>>>
>>>> bool arch_support_pci_device_ims(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>>>> {
>>>> 	return on_bare_metal() || hypercall_irq_domain_supported();
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> The VMM vendor list is for on_bare_metal, and suppose a vendor will
>>>> never be removed once being added to the list since the fact of running
>>>> in a VM never changes, regardless of whether this hypervisor supports
>>>> extra VMM hypercalls.
>>>
>>> This is what I imagined, this list will be forever, and this worries me.
>>>
>>> I don't know if it is true or not, but guess that at least Oracle and
>>> Microsoft bare metal devices and VMs will have same DMI_SYS_VENDOR.
>>
>> It's true. David Woodhouse also said it's the case for Amazon EC2 instances.
>>
>>>
>>> It means that this on_bare_metal() function won't work reliably in many
>>> cases. Also being part of include/linux/msi.h, at some point of time,
>>> this function will be picked by the users outside for the non-IMS cases.
>>>
>>> I didn't even mention custom forks of QEMU which are prohibited to change
>>> DMI_SYS_VENDOR and private clouds with custom solutions.
>>
>> In this case the private QEMU forks are encouraged to set CPUID (X86_
>> FEATURE_HYPERVISOR) if they do plan to adopt a different vendor name.
> 
> Does QEMU set this bit when it runs in host-passthrough CPU model?
> 
>>
>>>
>>> The current array makes DMI_SYS_VENDOR interface as some sort of ABI. If
>>> in the future,
>>> the QEMU will decide to use more hipster name, for example "qEmU", this
>>> function
>>> won't work.
>>>
>>> I'm aware that DMI_SYS_VENDOR is used heavily in the kernel code and
>>> various names for the same company are good example how not reliable it.
>>>
>>> The most hilarious example is "Dell/Dell Inc./Dell Inc/Dell Computer
>>> Corporation/Dell Computer",
>>> but other companies are not far from them.
>>>
>>> Luckily enough, this identification is used for hardware product that
>>> was released to the market and their name will be stable for that
>>> specific model. It is not the case here where we need to ensure future
>>> compatibility too (old kernel on new VM emulator).
>>>
>>> I'm not in position to say yes or no to this patch and don't have plans to do it.
>>> Just expressing my feeling that this solution is too hacky for my taste.
>>>
>>
>> I agree with your worries and solely relying on DMI_SYS_VENDOR is
>> definitely too hacky. In previous discussions with Thomas there is no
>> elegant way to handle this situation. It has to be a heuristic approach.
>> First we hope the CPUID bit is set properly in most cases thus is checked
>> first. Then other heuristics can be made for the remaining cases. DMI_
>> SYS_VENDOR is the first hint and more can be added later. For example,
>> when IOMMU is present there is vendor specific way to detect whether
>> it's real or virtual. Dave also mentioned some BIOS flag to indicate a
>> virtual machine. Now probably the real question here is whether people
>> are OK with CPUID+DMI_SYS_VENDOR combo check for now (and grow
>> it later) or prefer to having all identified heuristics so far in-place together...
> 
> IMHO, it should be as much as possible close to the end result.

Okay! This seems to be a right way to go.

The SMBIOS defines a 'virtual machine' bit in the BIOS characteristics
extension byte. It could be used as a possible way.

In order to support emulated IOMMU for fully virtualized guest, the
iommu vendors defined methods to distinguish between bare metal and VMM
(caching mode in VT-d for example).

I will go ahead with adding above two methods before checking the block
list.

Best regards,
baolu

  reply	other threads:[~2021-01-12  5:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-06  2:27 Lu Baolu
2021-01-06  6:06 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-01-06 10:10   ` Lu Baolu
2021-01-06 10:40     ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-01-06 15:23       ` Jason Gunthorpe
2021-01-06 16:01         ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-01-07  1:55           ` Lu Baolu
2021-01-07  2:04           ` Tian, Kevin
2021-01-07  6:09             ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-01-07  6:55               ` Tian, Kevin
2021-01-07  7:16                 ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-01-12  5:17                   ` Lu Baolu [this message]
2021-01-12  5:53                     ` Leon Romanovsky
2021-01-12  6:59                       ` Tian, Kevin
2021-01-12  7:34                         ` Leon Romanovsky

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=dfda8933-566c-1ec7-4ed4-427f094cb7c9@linux.intel.com \
    --to=baolu.lu@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=dave.jiang@intel.com \
    --cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=dwmw2@infradead.org \
    --cc=eric.auger@redhat.com \
    --cc=jacob.jun.pan@intel.com \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kevin.tian@intel.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kwankhede@nvidia.com \
    --cc=leon@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maz@kernel.org \
    --cc=megha.dey@intel.com \
    --cc=mona.hossain@intel.com \
    --cc=netanelg@mellanox.com \
    --cc=parav@mellanox.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rafael@kernel.org \
    --cc=samuel.ortiz@intel.com \
    --cc=sanjay.k.kumar@intel.com \
    --cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=vkoul@kernel.org \
    --cc=yan.y.zhao@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=yi.l.liu@intel.com \
    --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/1] platform-msi: Add platform check for subdevice irq domain' \
    /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

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).