From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2A11C3A5A0 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 21:08:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9AEF214DA for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 21:08:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728494AbfHSVId (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:08:33 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:45476 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728018AbfHSVId (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:08:33 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f69.google.com (mail-wr1-f69.google.com [209.85.221.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDE6A36899 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 21:08:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wr1-f69.google.com with SMTP id b1so5853576wru.4 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 14:08:32 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=LPz289eUqMdVK44r3XmdrIn3iZGWOuftMF6bJgSrgXw=; b=EoAd64x8I+WglB04NrMbBiBnIIAvyeT+4LOcl1GUFfnnmmM7eIFEuHo1SA8dna8MmU nG6HjcU2CagLj36XlBHQ3Wv3pwYySFpF02qF2N3e1enihibDJmKLSx1YPGESFByqbrgc ot0YT8uKR92gpjVXHFW4eCc3MVnZuI/Fk9QHVxokcUzijZEclscRu9rUf7+k0NxYIRrg XWgCFYufxiIItuW/gydNeNHrf398npVJPWGykibb4zh9qFM1rjZRVAXDucXOsP470jeD DYR1ySNI+z0xt3Yx8uz7V7ZVHecOySuhN8/AiEdjjNhyv3KHZllSpk8fVfHoT5ePxjID QwIQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX7+8hW9POLr5X5DtnZja5lM5yd0C7T/QO4vUJmvsh5NCI6dFTn GZ2akd1ZSAwkaG51p0CqcNxsEh6x7aeBAao6IOjy9SE68fP0NIhyZamGIWsOwbT3K9R3Bld+aRv UN3Udvi9T84alHyPn78+DQpEN X-Received: by 2002:a1c:1ac2:: with SMTP id a185mr22464975wma.96.1566248911492; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 14:08:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzzkGtqGEh4bXvK+QUgFZWjgeN4BxKK01EdaQMhbc46GISjxsEbgjr0J/8MhISgz5u3RfrvFQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:1ac2:: with SMTP id a185mr22464968wma.96.1566248911216; Mon, 19 Aug 2019 14:08:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com (bzq-79-180-62-110.red.bezeqint.net. [79.180.62.110]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 74sm28893350wma.15.2019.08.19.14.08.28 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 19 Aug 2019 14:08:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 17:08:22 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Jason Wang Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, jgg@ziepe.ca Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 0/9] Fixes for vhost metadata acceleration Message-ID: <20190819162733-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20190809054851.20118-1-jasowang@redhat.com> <20190810134948-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <360a3b91-1ac5-84c0-d34b-a4243fa748c4@redhat.com> <20190812054429-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <663be71f-f96d-cfbc-95a0-da0ac6b82d9f@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <663be71f-f96d-cfbc-95a0-da0ac6b82d9f@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 04:12:49PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > On 2019/8/12 下午5:49, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 10:44:51AM +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > On 2019/8/11 上午1:52, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 01:48:42AM -0400, Jason Wang wrote: > > > > > Hi all: > > > > > > > > > > This series try to fix several issues introduced by meta data > > > > > accelreation series. Please review. > > > > > > > > > > Changes from V4: > > > > > - switch to use spinlock synchronize MMU notifier with accessors > > > > > > > > > > Changes from V3: > > > > > - remove the unnecessary patch > > > > > > > > > > Changes from V2: > > > > > - use seqlck helper to synchronize MMU notifier with vhost worker > > > > > > > > > > Changes from V1: > > > > > - try not use RCU to syncrhonize MMU notifier with vhost worker > > > > > - set dirty pages after no readers > > > > > - return -EAGAIN only when we find the range is overlapped with > > > > > metadata > > > > > > > > > > Jason Wang (9): > > > > > vhost: don't set uaddr for invalid address > > > > > vhost: validate MMU notifier registration > > > > > vhost: fix vhost map leak > > > > > vhost: reset invalidate_count in vhost_set_vring_num_addr() > > > > > vhost: mark dirty pages during map uninit > > > > > vhost: don't do synchronize_rcu() in vhost_uninit_vq_maps() > > > > > vhost: do not use RCU to synchronize MMU notifier with worker > > > > > vhost: correctly set dirty pages in MMU notifiers callback > > > > > vhost: do not return -EAGAIN for non blocking invalidation too early > > > > > > > > > > drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 202 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- > > > > > drivers/vhost/vhost.h | 6 +- > > > > > 2 files changed, 122 insertions(+), 86 deletions(-) > > > > This generally looks more solid. > > > > > > > > But this amounts to a significant overhaul of the code. > > > > > > > > At this point how about we revert 7f466032dc9e5a61217f22ea34b2df932786bbfc > > > > for this release, and then re-apply a corrected version > > > > for the next one? > > > > > > If possible, consider we've actually disabled the feature. How about just > > > queued those patches for next release? > > > > > > Thanks > > Sorry if I was unclear. My idea is that > > 1. I revert the disabled code > > 2. You send a patch readding it with all the fixes squashed > > 3. Maybe optimizations on top right away? > > 4. We queue *that* for next and see what happens. > > > > And the advantage over the patchy approach is that the current patches > > are hard to review. E.g. it's not reasonable to ask RCU guys to review > > the whole of vhost for RCU usage but it's much more reasonable to ask > > about a specific patch. > > > Ok. Then I agree to revert. > > Thanks Great, so please send the following: - revert - squashed and fixed patch -- MST