linux-kernel - Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v11 6/6] virtio-balloon: VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_CMD

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20170628175956-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 28 Jun 2017 18:01:58 +0300
From:   "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:     Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@...el.com>
Cc:     "virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org" <virtio-dev@...ts.oasis-open.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "qemu-devel@...gnu.org" <qemu-devel@...gnu.org>,
        "virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
        <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        "kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
        "david@...hat.com" <david@...hat.com>,
        "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
        "cornelia.huck@...ibm.com" <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>,
        "akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        "mgorman@...hsingularity.net" <mgorman@...hsingularity.net>,
        "aarcange@...hat.com" <aarcange@...hat.com>,
        "amit.shah@...hat.com" <amit.shah@...hat.com>,
        "pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        "liliang.opensource@...il.com" <liliang.opensource@...il.com>,
        "riel@...hat.com" <riel@...hat.com>,
        "nilal@...hat.com" <nilal@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [PATCH v11 6/6] virtio-balloon:
 VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_CMD_VQ

On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 04:40:39PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote:
> On 06/21/2017 08:28 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 11:28:00AM +0800, Wei Wang wrote:
> > > On 06/21/2017 12:18 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jun 09, 2017 at 06:41:41PM +0800, Wei Wang wrote:
> > > > > -	if (!virtqueue_indirect_desc_table_add(vq, desc, num)) {
> > > > > +	if (!virtqueue_indirect_desc_table_add(vq, desc, *num)) {
> > > > >    		virtqueue_kick(vq);
> > > > > -		wait_event(vb->acked, virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len));
> > > > > -		vb->balloon_page_chunk.chunk_num = 0;
> > > > > +		if (busy_wait)
> > > > > +			while (!virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len) &&
> > > > > +			       !virtqueue_is_broken(vq))
> > > > > +				cpu_relax();
> > > > > +		else
> > > > > +			wait_event(vb->acked, virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len));
> > > > This is something I didn't previously notice.
> > > > As you always keep a single buffer in flight, you do not
> > > > really need indirect at all. Just add all descriptors
> > > > in the ring directly, then kick.
> > > > 
> > > > E.g.
> > > > 	virtqueue_add_first
> > > > 	virtqueue_add_next
> > > > 	virtqueue_add_last
> > > > 
> > > > ?
> > > > 
> > > > You also want a flag to avoid allocations but there's no need to do it
> > > > per descriptor, set it on vq.
> > > > 
> > > Without using the indirect table, I'm thinking about changing to use
> > > the standard sg (i.e. struct scatterlist), instead of vring_desc, so that
> > > we don't need to modify or add any new functions of virtqueue_add().
> > > 
> > > In this case, we will kmalloc an array of sgs in probe(), and we can add
> > > the sgs one by one to the vq, which won't trigger the allocation of an
> > > indirect table inside virtqueue_add(), and then kick when all are added.
> > > 
> > > Best,
> > > Wei
> > And allocate headers too? This can work. API extensions aren't
> > necessarily a bad idea though. The API I suggest above is preferable
> > for the simple reason that it can work without INDIRECT flag
> > support in hypervisor.
> 
> OK, probably we don't need to add a desc to the vq - we can just use
> the vq's desc, like this:
> 
> int virtqueue_add_first(struct virtqueue *_vq,
>                                      uint64_t addr,
>                                      uint32_t len,
>                                      bool in,
>                                      unsigned int *idx) {
> 
>     ...
>    uint16_t desc_flags = in ? VRING_DESC_F_NEXT | VRING_DESC_F_WRITE :
>                                              VRING_DESC_F_NEXT;
> 
>     vq->vring.desc[vq->free_head].addr = addr;
>     vq->vring.desc[vq->free_head].len = len;
>     vq->vring.desc[vq->free_head].flags = cpu_to_virtio16(_vq->vdev, flags);
>     /* return to the caller the desc id */
>     *idx = vq->free_head;
>     ...
> }
> 
> int virtqueue_add_next(struct virtqueue *_vq,
>                                      uint64_t addr,
>                                      uint32_t len,
>                                      bool in,
>                                      bool end,
>                                      unsigned int *idx) {
>     ...
>     vq->vring.desc[*idx].next = vq->free_head;
>     vq->vring.desc[vq->free_head].addr = addr;
>     ...
>     if (end)
>         remove the VRING_DESC_F_NEXT flag
> }
> 

Add I would say add-last.

> 
> What do you think? We can also combine the two functions into one.
> 
> 
> 
> Best,
> Wei

With an enum? Yes that's also an option.

-- 
MST