netdev - Re: Query: Is it possible to lose interrupts between vhost and virtio

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]

Date:	Thu, 14 Aug 2014 12:02:31 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Cc:	"Zhangjie (HZ)" <zhangjie14@...wei.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, qinchuanyu@...wei.com,
	liuyongan@...wei.com, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: Query: Is it possible  to lose interrupts between vhost and
 virtio_net during migration?

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 04:52:40PM +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> On 08/07/2014 08:47 PM, Zhangjie (HZ) wrote:
> > On 2014/8/5 20:14, Zhangjie (HZ) wrote:
> >> On 2014/8/5 17:49, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 02:29:28PM +0800, Zhangjie (HZ) wrote:
> >>>> Jason is right, the new order is not the cause of network unreachable.
> >>>> Changing order seems not work. After about 40 times, the problem occurs again.
> >>>> Maybe there is other hidden reasons for that.
> >> I modified the code to change the order myself yesterday.
> >> This result is about my code.
> >>> To make sure, you tested the patch that I posted to list:
> >>> "vhost_net: stop guest notifiers after backend"?
> >>>
> >>> Please confirm.
> >>>
> >> OK, I will test with your patch "vhost_net: stop guest notifiers after backend".
> >>
> > Unfortunately, after using the patch "vhost_net: stop guest notifiers after backend",
> > Linux VMs stopt themselves a few minutes after they were started.
> >> @@ -308,6 +308,12 @@ int vhost_net_start(VirtIODevice *dev, NetClientState *ncs,
> >>         goto err;
> >>     }
> >>
> >> +    r = k->set_guest_notifiers(qbus->parent, total_queues * 2, true);
> >> +    if (r < 0) {
> >> +        error_report("Error binding guest notifier: %d", -r);
> >> +        goto err;
> >> +    }
> >> +
> >>     for (i = 0; i < total_queues; i++) {
> >>         r = vhost_net_start_one(get_vhost_net(ncs[i].peer), dev, i * 2);
> >>
> >> @@ -316,12 +322,6 @@ int vhost_net_start(VirtIODevice *dev, NetClientState *ncs,
> >>         }
> >>     }
> >>
> >> -    r = k->set_guest_notifiers(qbus->parent, total_queues * 2, true);
> >> -    if (r < 0) {
> >> -        error_report("Error binding guest notifier: %d", -r);
> >> -        goto err;
> >> -    }
> >> -
> >>     return 0;
> > I wonder if k->set_guest_notifiers should be called after "hdev->started = true;" in vhost_dev_start.
> 
> Michael, can we just remove those assertions? Since you may want to set
> guest notifiers before starting the backend.

Which assertions?

> Another question for virtio_pci_vector_poll(): why not using
> msix_notify() instead of msix_set_pending().

We can do that but the effect will be same since we know
vector is masked.

> If so, there's no need to
> change the vhost_net_start() ?

Confused, don't see the connection.

> Zhang Jie, is this a regression? If yes, could you please do a bisection
> to find the first bad commit.
> 
> Thanks

Pretty sure it's the mq patch: a9f98bb5ebe6fb1869321dcc58e72041ae626ad8

    Since we may have many vhost/net devices for a virtio-net device.  The setting of
    guest notifiers were moved out of the starting/stopping of a specific vhost
    thread. The vhost_net_{start|stop}() were renamed to
    vhost_net_{start|stop}_one(), and a new vhost_net_{start|stop}() were introduced
    to configure the guest notifiers and start/stop all vhost/vhost_net devices.

-- 
MST
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html