linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] s390/virtio_ccw: don't allocate/assign airqs for non-existing queues

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: <20250406144025-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2025 14:42:44 -0400
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
Cc: Halil Pasic <pasic@...ux.ibm.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org, Chandra Merla <cmerla@...hat.com>,
	Stable@...r.kernel.org, Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>,
	Thomas Huth <thuth@...hat.com>, Eric Farman <farman@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Vasily Gorbik <gor@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Sven Schnelle <svens@...ux.ibm.com>,
	Wei Wang <wei.w.wang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] s390/virtio_ccw: don't allocate/assign airqs for
 non-existing queues

On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 03:48:49PM +0200, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 04.04.25 15:36, Halil Pasic wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:55:09 +0200
> > David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > For virito-balloon, we should probably do the following:
> > > 
> > >   From 38e340c2bb53c2a7cc7c675f5dfdd44ecf7701d9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > > From: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> > > Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 12:53:16 +0200
> > > Subject: [PATCH] virtio-balloon: Fix queue index assignment for
> > >    non-existing queues
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
> > > ---
> > >    device-types/balloon/description.tex | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
> > >    1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/device-types/balloon/description.tex b/device-types/balloon/description.tex
> > > index a1d9603..a7396ff 100644
> > > --- a/device-types/balloon/description.tex
> > > +++ b/device-types/balloon/description.tex
> > > @@ -16,6 +16,21 @@ \subsection{Device ID}\label{sec:Device Types / Memory Balloon Device / Device I
> > >      5
> > >    \subsection{Virtqueues}\label{sec:Device Types / Memory Balloon Device / Virtqueues}
> > > +
> > > +\begin{description}
> > > +\item[inflateq] Exists unconditionally.
> > > +\item[deflateq] Exists unconditionally.
> > > +\item[statsq] Only exists if VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_STATS_VQ is set.
> > > +\item[free_page_vq] Only exists if VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_FREE_PAGE_HINT is set.
> > > +\item[reporting_vq] Only exists if VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_PAGE_REPORTING is set.
> > 
> > s/is set/is negotiated/?
> > 
> > I think we should stick to "feature is offered" and "feature is
> > negotiated".
> > 
> > > +\end{description}
> > > +
> > > +\begin{note}
> > > +Virtqueue indexes are assigned sequentially for existing queues, starting
> > > +with index 0; consequently, if a virtqueue does not exist, it does not get
> > > +an index assigned. Assuming all virtqueues exist for a device, the indexes
> > > +are:
> > > +
> > >    \begin{description}
> > >    \item[0] inflateq
> > >    \item[1] deflateq
> > > @@ -23,12 +38,7 @@ \subsection{Virtqueues}\label{sec:Device Types / Memory Balloon Device / Virtque
> > >    \item[3] free_page_vq
> > >    \item[4] reporting_vq
> > >    \end{description}
> > > -
> > > -  statsq only exists if VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_STATS_VQ is set.
> > > -
> > > -  free_page_vq only exists if VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_FREE_PAGE_HINT is set.
> > > -
> > > -  reporting_vq only exists if VIRTIO_BALLOON_F_PAGE_REPORTING is set.
> > > +\end{note}
> > >    \subsection{Feature bits}\label{sec:Device Types / Memory Balloon Device / Feature bits}
> > >    \begin{description}
> > 
> > Sounds good to me! But I'm still a little confused by the "holes". What
> > confuses me is that i can think of at least 2 distinct types of "holes":
> > 1) Holes that can be filled later. The queue conceptually exists, but
> >     there is no need to back it with any resources for now because it is
> >     dormant (it can be seen a hole in comparison to queues that need to
> >    materialize -- vring, notifiers, ...)
> > 2) Holes that can not be filled without resetting the device: i.e. if
> >     certain features are not negotiated, then a queue X does not exist,
> >     but subsequent queues retain their index.
> 
> I think it is not about "negotiated", that might be the wrong terminology.
> 
> E.g., in QEMU virtio_balloon_device_realize() we define the virtqueues
> (virtio_add_queue()) if virtio_has_feature(s->host_features).
> 
> That is, it's independent of a feature negotiation (IIUC), it's static for
> the device --  "host_features"


No no that is a bad idea. Breaks forward compatibility.

Oh my. I did not realize. It is really broken hopelessly.

Because, note, the guest looks at the guest features :)


Now I am beginning to think we should leave the spec alone
and fix the drivers ... Ugh ....




> 
> Is that really "negotiated" or is it "the device offers the feature X" ?
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> 
> David / dhildenb