[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20210930144752.GA67618@ziepe.ca>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2021 11:47:52 -0300
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
To: Max Gurtovoy <mgurtovoy@...dia.com>
Cc: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
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, Sep 30, 2021 at 12:34:19PM +0300, Max Gurtovoy wrote:
> > When we add the migration extension this cannot change, so after
> > open_device() the device should be operational.
>
> if it's waiting for incoming migration blob, it is not running.
It cannot be waiting for a migration blob after open_device, that is
not backwards compatible.
Just prior to open device the vfio pci layer will generate a FLR to
the function so we expect that post open_device has a fresh from reset
fully running device state.
> > The reported state in the migration region should accurately reflect
> > what the device is currently doing. If the device is operational then
> > it must report running, not stopped.
>
> STOP in migration meaning.
As Alex and I have said several times STOP means the internal state is
not allowed to change.
> > driver will see RESUMING toggle off so it will trigger a
> > de-serialization
>
> You mean stop serialization ?
No, I mean it will take all the migration data that has been uploaded
through the migration region and de-serialize it into active device
state.
> > driver will see SAVING toggled on so it will serialize the new state
> > (either the pre-copy state or the post-copy state dpending on the
> > running bit)
>
> lets leave the bits and how you implement the state numbering aside.
You've missed the point. This isn't a FSM. It is a series of three
control bits that we have assigned logical meaning their combinatoins.
The algorithm I gave is a control centric algorithm not a state
centric algorithm and matches the direction Alex thought this was
being designed for.
> If you finish resuming you can move to a new state (that we should add) =>
> RESUMED.
It is not a state machine. Once you stop prentending this is
implementing a FSM Alex's position makes perfect sense.
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists