From: Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
<izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com>, <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfio/pci: Support error recovery
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 14:11:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <58465677.1000403@cn.fujitsu.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161205091730.568e5079@t450s.home>
On 12/06/2016 12:17 AM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Dec 2016 13:52:03 +0800
> Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/04/2016 11:30 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>> On Sun, 4 Dec 2016 20:16:42 +0800
>>> Cao jin <caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/01/2016 10:55 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 1 Dec 2016 21:40:00 +0800
>>>>
>>>>>>> If an AER fault occurs and the user doesn't do a reset, what
>>>>>>> happens when that device is released and a host driver tries to make
>>>>>>> use of it? The user makes no commitment to do a reset and there are
>>>>>>> only limited configurations where we even allow the user to perform a
>>>>>>> reset.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Limited? Do you mean the things __pci_dev_reset() can do?
>>>>>
>>>>> I mean that there are significant device and guest configuration
>>>>> restrictions in order to support AER. For instance, all the functions
>>>>> of the slot need to appear in a PCI-e topology in the guest with all
>>>>> the functions in the right place such that a guest bus reset translates
>>>>> into a host bus reset. The physical functions cannot be split between
>>>>> guests even if IOMMU isolation would otherwise allow it. The user
>>>>> needs to explicitly enable AER support for the devices. A VM need to
>>>>> be specifically configured for AER support in order to set any sort of
>>>>> expectations of a guest directed bus reset, let alone a guarantee that
>>>>> it will happen. So all the existing VMs, where functions are split
>>>>> between guests, or the topology isn't exactly right, or AER isn't
>>>>> enabled see a regression from the above change as the device is no
>>>>> longer reset.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not clear why set these restrictions in the current design. I take
>>>> a glance at older versions of qemu's patchset, their thoughts is:
>>>> translate a guest bus reset into a host bus reset(Which is
>>>> unreasonable[*] to me). And I guess, that's the *cause* of these
>>>> restrictions? Is there any other stories behind these restrictions?
>>>>
>>>> [*] In physical world, set bridge's secondary bus reset would send
>>>> hot-reset TLP to all functions below, trigger every device's reset
>>>> separately. Emulated device should behave the same, means just using
>>>> each device's DeviceClass->reset method.
>>>
>>> Are you trying to say that an FLR is equivalent to a link reset?
>>
>> No. Look at old versions patchset, there is one names "vote the
>> function 0 to do host bus reset when aer occurred"[1], that is what I
>> called "translate guest link reset to host link reset", and what I think
>> unreasonable(and I think it also does it wrongly). So in v10 version of
>> mine, I dropped it.
>>
>> [1]https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2016-05/msg02987.html
>>
>> If "translate guest link reset to host link reset" is right, I can
>> understand these restrictions[2][3].
>>
>> [2]. All physical functions in a single card must be assigned to the VM
>> with AER enabled on each and configured on the same virtual bus.
>> [3]. Don't place other devices under the virtual bus in [2], no matter
>> physical, emulated, or paravirtual, even if other device
>> supporting AER signaling
>>
>> Certain device's FLR calls its DeviceClass->reset method; link reset
>> calls DeviceClass->reset of each device which on the bus. So, apparently
>> they have difference. But if there is only 1 vfio-pci device under the
>> virtual pci bus, I think FLR can be equivalent to a link reset, right?
>
> No. An FLR resets the device while a secondary bus reset does a reset
> of the link and the device. AER errors are sometimes issues with the
> link, not the device. If we were to perform only an FLR, we're not
> performing the same reset as would be done on bare metal.
>
Thanks for you explanation, it does helps, except the last sentence, I
think I understand it now: fatal error implies there may be link issue
exists(pci express spec: 6.2.2.2.1), so, should do link reset for fatal
error(that is what and why aer core does). And so, in patch[1] above,
qemu does a link reset when seeing secondary bus reset bit of virtual
bus got set. is it right?
--
Sincerely,
Cao jin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-06 6:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-27 11:34 [PATCH] vfio/pci: Support error recovery Cao jin
2016-11-28 3:00 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-11-28 9:32 ` Cao jin
2016-11-30 1:46 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-01 13:38 ` Cao jin
2016-12-01 4:04 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-01 4:51 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-01 13:40 ` Cao jin
2016-12-06 3:46 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-06 6:47 ` Cao jin
2016-12-01 13:40 ` Cao jin
2016-12-01 14:55 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-04 12:16 ` Cao jin
2016-12-04 15:30 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-05 5:52 ` Cao jin
2016-12-05 16:17 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-06 3:55 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-06 4:59 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-06 10:46 ` Cao jin
2016-12-06 15:35 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-07 2:49 ` Cao jin
2016-12-08 14:46 ` Cao jin
2016-12-08 16:30 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-09 3:40 ` Cao jin
2016-12-09 3:40 ` Cao jin
2016-12-06 6:11 ` Cao jin [this message]
2016-12-06 15:25 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-07 2:58 ` Cao jin
2016-12-12 13:49 ` Cao jin
2016-12-12 19:12 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-12 22:29 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-12 22:43 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-13 3:15 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-13 3:39 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-13 16:12 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-13 16:27 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-14 1:58 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-14 3:00 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-14 22:20 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-14 22:47 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-14 23:00 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-14 23:32 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-14 10:24 ` Cao jin
2016-12-14 22:16 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-14 22:25 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-14 22:49 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-15 13:56 ` Cao jin
2016-12-15 14:50 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2016-12-15 22:01 ` Alex Williamson
2016-12-16 10:15 ` Cao jin
2016-12-16 10:15 ` Cao jin
2016-12-15 17:02 ` Alex Williamson
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=58465677.1000403@cn.fujitsu.com \
--to=caoj.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=izumi.taku@jp.fujitsu.com \
--cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
/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
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).