QEMU-Devel Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
To: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, vgoyal@redhat.com,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] virtio: add vhost-user-fs base device
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 10:21:41 +0100
Message-ID: <20190917092141.GA3371@work-vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190822085237.GA20491@stefanha-x1.localdomain>

* Stefan Hajnoczi (stefanha@redhat.com) wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 21, 2019 at 08:11:18PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote:
> > * Michael S. Tsirkin (mst@redhat.com) wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2019 at 03:33:20PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git) wrote:
> > > > +static void vuf_handle_output(VirtIODevice *vdev, VirtQueue *vq)
> > > > +{
> > > > +    /* Do nothing */
> > > 
> > > Why is this safe?  Is this because this never triggers?  assert(0) then?
> > > If it triggers then backend won't be notified, which might
> > > cause it to get stuck.
> > 
> > We never process these queues in qemu - always in the guest; so am I
> > correct in thinking those shouldn't be used?
> 
> s/guest/vhost-user backend process/
> 
> vuf_handle_output() should never be called.

It turns out it does get called in one case during cleanup, in the case
where the daemon died before qemu,  virtio_bus_cleanup_host_notifier goes
around the notifiers and calls all the ones where there's anything left
in the eventfd.

Dave

> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +static void vuf_guest_notifier_mask(VirtIODevice *vdev, int idx,
> > > > +                                            bool mask)
> > > > +{
> > > > +    VHostUserFS *fs = VHOST_USER_FS(vdev);
> > > > +
> > > > +    vhost_virtqueue_mask(&fs->vhost_dev, vdev, idx, mask);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +static bool vuf_guest_notifier_pending(VirtIODevice *vdev, int idx)
> > > > +{
> > > > +    VHostUserFS *fs = VHOST_USER_FS(vdev);
> > > > +
> > > > +    return vhost_virtqueue_pending(&fs->vhost_dev, idx);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +static void vuf_device_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)
> > > > +{
> > > > +    VirtIODevice *vdev = VIRTIO_DEVICE(dev);
> > > > +    VHostUserFS *fs = VHOST_USER_FS(dev);
> > > > +    unsigned int i;
> > > > +    size_t len;
> > > > +    int ret;
> > > > +
> > > > +    if (!fs->conf.chardev.chr) {
> > > > +        error_setg(errp, "missing chardev");
> > > > +        return;
> > > > +    }
> > > > +
> > > > +    if (!fs->conf.tag) {
> > > > +        error_setg(errp, "missing tag property");
> > > > +        return;
> > > > +    }
> > > > +    len = strlen(fs->conf.tag);
> > > > +    if (len == 0) {
> > > > +        error_setg(errp, "tag property cannot be empty");
> > > > +        return;
> > > > +    }
> > > > +    if (len > sizeof_field(struct virtio_fs_config, tag)) {
> > > > +        error_setg(errp, "tag property must be %zu bytes or less",
> > > > +                   sizeof_field(struct virtio_fs_config, tag));
> > > > +        return;
> > > > +    }
> > > > +
> > > > +    if (fs->conf.num_queues == 0) {
> > > > +        error_setg(errp, "num-queues property must be larger than 0");
> > > > +        return;
> > > > +    }
> > > 
> > > The strange thing is that actual # of queues is this number + 2.
> > > And this affects an optimal number of vectors (see patch 2).
> > > Not sure what a good solution is - include the
> > > mandatory queues in the number?
> > > Needs to be documented in some way.
> > 
> > Should we be doing nvectors the same way virtio-scsi-pci does it;
> > with a magic 'unspecified' default where it sets the nvectors based on
> > the number of queues?
> > 
> > I think my preference is not to show the users the mandatory queues.
> 
> I agree.  Users want to control multiqueue, not on the absolute number
> of virtqueues including mandatory queues.
> 
> > > > +
> > > > +    if (!is_power_of_2(fs->conf.queue_size)) {
> > > > +        error_setg(errp, "queue-size property must be a power of 2");
> > > > +        return;
> > > > +    }
> > > 
> > > Hmm packed ring allows non power of 2 ...
> > > We need to look into a generic helper to support VQ
> > > size checks.
> > 
> > Which would also have to include the negotiation of where it's doing
> > packaged ring?
> 
> It's impossible to perform this check at .realize() time since the
> packed virtqueue layout is negotiated via a VIRTIO feature bit.  This
> puts us in the awkward position of either failing when the guest has
> already booted or rounding up the queue size for split ring layouts
> (with a warning message?).


--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK


  parent reply index

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-16 14:33 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Add virtio-fs (experimental) Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)
2019-08-16 14:33 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] virtio: add vhost-user-fs base device Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)
2019-08-18 11:08   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-08-20 12:24     ` Cornelia Huck
2019-08-20 13:39       ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-08-21 17:52     ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-08-21 19:11     ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2019-08-22  8:52       ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-08-22  9:19         ` Cornelia Huck
2019-08-23  9:25           ` Stefan Hajnoczi
2019-09-17  9:21         ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert [this message]
2019-08-16 14:33 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/2] virtio: add vhost-user-fs-pci device Dr. David Alan Gilbert (git)
2019-08-16 18:38 ` [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] Add virtio-fs (experimental) no-reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=20190917092141.GA3371@work-vm \
    --to=dgilbert@redhat.com \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
    --cc=stefanha@redhat.com \
    --cc=vgoyal@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

QEMU-Devel Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/0 qemu-devel/git/0.git
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel/1 qemu-devel/git/1.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 qemu-devel qemu-devel/ https://lore.kernel.org/qemu-devel \
		qemu-devel@nongnu.org
	public-inbox-index qemu-devel

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.nongnu.qemu-devel


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git