[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210929164409.3c33e311.alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 16:44:09 -0600
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>
To: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@...dia.com>
Cc: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
Yishai Hadas <yishaih@...dia.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Kirti Wankhede <kwankhede@...dia.com>, <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH mlx5-next 2/7] vfio: Add an API to check migration state
transition validity
On Thu, 30 Sep 2021 00:48:55 +0300
Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@...dia.com> wrote:
> On 9/29/2021 7:14 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 06:28:44PM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
> >
> >>> So you have a device that's actively modifying its internal state,
> >>> performing I/O, including DMA (thereby dirtying VM memory), all while
> >>> in the _STOP state? And you don't see this as a problem?
> >> I don't see how is it different from vfio-pci situation.
> > vfio-pci provides no way to observe the migration state. It isn't
> > "000b"
>
> Alex said that there is a problem of compatibility.
>
> I migration SW is not involved, nobody will read this migration state.
The _STOP state has a specific meaning regardless of whether userspace
reads the device state value. I think what you're suggesting is that
the device reports itself as _STOP'd but it's actually _RUNNING. Is
that the compatibility workaround, create a self inconsistency?
We cannot impose on userspace to move a device from _STOP to _RUNNING
simply because the device supports the migration region, nor should we
report a device state that is inconsistent with the actual device state.
> >> Maybe we need to rename STOP state. We can call it READY or LIVE or
> >> NON_MIGRATION_STATE.
> > It was a poor choice to use 000b as stop, but it doesn't really
> > matter. The mlx5 driver should just pre-init this readable to running.
>
> I guess we can do it for this reason. There is no functional problem nor
> compatibility issue here as was mentioned.
>
> But still we need the kernel to track transitions. We don't want to
> allow moving from RESUMING to SAVING state for example. How this
> transition can be allowed ?
>
> In this case we need to fail the request from the migration SW...
_RESUMING to _SAVING seems like a good way to test round trip migration
without running the device to modify the state. Potentially it's a
means to update a saved device migration data stream to a newer format
using an intermediate driver version.
If a driver is written such that it simply sees clearing the _RESUME
bit as an indicator to de-serialize the data stream to the device, and
setting the _SAVING flag as an indicator to re-serialize that data
stream from the device, then this is just a means to make use of
existing data paths.
The uAPI specifies a means for drivers to reject a state change, but
that risks failing to support a transition which might find mainstream
use cases. I don't think common code should be responsible for
filtering out viable transitions. Thanks,
Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists