Message-ID: <CACGkMEtvVOtqAgY4Yzt_4=t8yfGJho4d9C=X8MQhW0ZKw1sDNA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 Jul 2022 15:36:13 +0800
From:   Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
To:     Si-Wei Liu <si-wei.liu@...cle.com>
Cc:     "Zhu, Lingshan" <lingshan.zhu@...el.com>,
        Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>,
        "mst@...hat.com" <mst@...hat.com>, Eli Cohen <elic@...dia.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "xieyongji@...edance.com" <xieyongji@...edance.com>,
        "gautam.dawar@....com" <gautam.dawar@....com>,
        "virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org" 
        <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 4/6] vDPA: !FEATURES_OK should not block querying
 device config space

On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 3:09 PM Si-Wei Liu <si-wei.liu@...cle.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 7/27/2022 7:06 PM, Jason Wang wrote:
> >
> > 在 2022/7/28 08:56, Si-Wei Liu 写道:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/27/2022 4:47 AM, Zhu, Lingshan wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On 7/27/2022 5:43 PM, Si-Wei Liu wrote:
> >>>> Sorry to chime in late in the game. For some reason I couldn't get
> >>>> to most emails for this discussion (I only subscribed to the
> >>>> virtualization list), while I was taking off amongst the past few
> >>>> weeks.
> >>>>
> >>>> It looks to me this patch is incomplete. Noted down the way in
> >>>> vdpa_dev_net_config_fill(), we have the following:
> >>>>          features = vdev->config->get_driver_features(vdev);
> >>>>          if (nla_put_u64_64bit(msg,
> >>>> VDPA_ATTR_DEV_NEGOTIATED_FEATURES, features,
> >>>>                                VDPA_ATTR_PAD))
> >>>>                  return -EMSGSIZE;
> >>>>
> >>>> Making call to .get_driver_features() doesn't make sense when
> >>>> feature negotiation isn't complete. Neither should present
> >>>> negotiated_features to userspace before negotiation is done.
> >>>>
> >>>> Similarly, max_vqp through vdpa_dev_net_mq_config_fill() probably
> >>>> should not show before negotiation is done - it depends on driver
> >>>> features negotiated.
> >>> I have another patch in this series introduces device_features and
> >>> will report device_features to the userspace even features
> >>> negotiation not done. Because the spec says we should allow driver
> >>> access the config space before FEATURES_OK.
> >> The config space can be accessed by guest before features_ok doesn't
> >> necessarily mean the value is valid.
> >
> >
> > It's valid as long as the device offers the feature:
> >
> > "The device MUST allow reading of any device-specific configuration
> > field before FEATURES_OK is set by the driver. This includes fields
> > which are conditional on feature bits, as long as those feature bits
> > are offered by the device."
> I guess this statement only conveys that the field in config space can
> be read before FEATURES_OK is set, though it does not *explicitly*
> states the validity of field.

My understanding is that it should be valid as long as the device
offers the feature.

For example, if _MQ is offered by device, the max_virt_queue_pairs is
always valid and can be read from the driver no matter whether _MQ is
negotiated.

>
> And looking at:
>
> "The mac address field always exists (though is only valid if
> VIRTIO_NET_F_MAC is set), and status only exists if VIRTIO_NET_F_STATUS
> is set."
>
> It appears to me there's a border line set between "exist" and "valid".
> If I understand the spec wording correctly, a spec-conforming device
> implementation may or may not offer valid status value in the config
> space when VIRTIO_NET_F_STATUS is offered, but before the feature is
> negotiated.

That's not what I read, maybe Michael can clarify this.

> On the other hand, config space should contain valid mac
> address the moment VIRTIO_NET_F_MAC feature is offered, regardless being
> negotiated or not.

I agree here.

>By that, there seems to be leeway for the device
> implementation to decide when config space field may become valid,
> though for most of QEMU's software virtio devices, valid value is
> present to config space the very first moment when feature is offered.
>
> "If the VIRTIO_NET_F_MAC feature bit is set, the configuration space mac
> entry indicates the “physical” address of the network card, otherwise
> the driver would typically generate a random local MAC address."
> "If the VIRTIO_NET_F_STATUS feature bit is negotiated, the link status
> comes from the bottom bit of status. Otherwise, the driver assumes it’s
> active."

This is mostly the way how drivers that don't support _F_STATUS work.

>
> And also there are special cases where the read of specific
> configuration space field MUST be deferred to until FEATURES_OK is set:
>
> "If the VIRTIO_BLK_F_CONFIG_WCE feature is negotiated, the cache mode
> can be read or set through the writeback field. 0 corresponds to a
> writethrough cache, 1 to a writeback cache11. The cache mode after reset
> can be either writeback or writethrough. The actual mode can be
> determined by reading writeback after feature negotiation."
> "The driver MUST NOT read writeback before setting the FEATURES_OK
> device status bit."

This seems to conflict with the normatives I quoted above, and I don't
get why we need this.

> "If VIRTIO_BLK_F_CONFIG_WCE is negotiated but VIRTIO_BLK_F_FLUSH is not,
> the device MUST initialize writeback to 0."
>
> Since the spec doesn't explicitly mandate the validity of each config
> space field when feature of concern is offered, to be safer we'd have to
> live with odd device implementation. I know for sure QEMU software
> devices won't for 99% of these cases, but that's not what is currently
> defined in the spec.
>
> >
> >
> >> You may want to double check with Michael for what he quoted earlier:
> >>> Nope:
> >>>
> >>> 2.5.1  Driver Requirements: Device Configuration Space
> >>>
> >>> ...
> >>>
> >>> For optional configuration space fields, the driver MUST check that
> >>> the corresponding feature is offered
> >>> before accessing that part of the configuration space.
> >>
> >> and how many driver bugs taking wrong assumption of the validity of
> >> config space field without features_ok. I am not sure what use case
> >> you want to expose config resister values for before features_ok, if
> >> it's mostly for live migration I guess it's probably heading a wrong
> >> direction.
> >
> >
> > I guess it's not for migration.
> Then what's the other possible use case than live migration, were to
> expose config space values? Troubleshooting config space discrepancy
> between vDPA and the emulated virtio device in userspace? Or tracking
> changes in config space across feature negotiation, but for what? It'd
> be beneficial to the interface design if the specific use case can be
> clearly described...

Monitoring or debugging I guess.

Thanks

>
>
> > For migration, a provision with the correct features/capability would
> > be sufficient.
> Right, that's what I thought too. It doesn't need to expose config space
> values, simply exporting all attributes for vdpa device creation will do
> the work.
>
> -Siwei
>
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Last but not the least, this "vdpa dev config" command was not
> >>>> designed to display the real config space register values in the
> >>>> first place. Quoting the vdpa-dev(8) man page:
> >>>>
> >>>>> vdpa dev config show - Show configuration of specific device or
> >>>>> all devices.
> >>>>> DEV - specifies the vdpa device to show its configuration. If this
> >>>>> argument is omitted all devices configuration is listed.
> >>>> It doesn't say anything about configuration space or register
> >>>> values in config space. As long as it can convey the config
> >>>> attribute when instantiating vDPA device instance, and more
> >>>> importantly, the config can be easily imported from or exported to
> >>>> userspace tools when trying to reconstruct vdpa instance intact on
> >>>> destination host for live migration, IMHO in my personal
> >>>> interpretation it doesn't matter what the config space may present.
> >>>> It may be worth while adding a new debug command to expose the real
> >>>> register value, but that's another story.
> >>> I am not sure getting your points. vDPA now reports device feature
> >>> bits(device_features) and negotiated feature bits(driver_features),
> >>> and yes, the drivers features can be a subset of the device
> >>> features; and the vDPA device features can be a subset of the
> >>> management device features.
> >> What I said is after unblocking the conditional check, you'd have to
> >> handle the case for each of the vdpa attribute when feature
> >> negotiation is not yet done: basically the register values you got
> >> from config space via the vdpa_get_config_unlocked() call is not
> >> considered to be valid before features_ok (per-spec). Although in
> >> some case you may get sane value, such behavior is generally
> >> undefined. If you desire to show just the device_features alone
> >> without any config space field, which the device had advertised
> >> *before feature negotiation is complete*, that'll be fine. But looks
> >> to me this is not how patch has been implemented. Probably need some
> >> more work?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> -Siwei
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> Having said, please consider to drop the Fixes tag, as appears to
> >>>> me you're proposing a new feature rather than fixing a real issue.
> >>> it's a new feature to report the device feature bits than only
> >>> negotiated features, however this patch is a must, or it will block
> >>> the device feature bits reporting. but I agree, the fix tag is not a
> >>> must.
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks,
> >>>> -Siwei
> >>>>
> >>>> On 7/1/2022 3:12 PM, Parav Pandit via Virtualization wrote:
> >>>>>> From: Zhu Lingshan<lingshan.zhu@...el.com>
> >>>>>> Sent: Friday, July 1, 2022 9:28 AM
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Users may want to query the config space of a vDPA device, to
> >>>>>> choose a
> >>>>>> appropriate one for a certain guest. This means the users need to
> >>>>>> read the
> >>>>>> config space before FEATURES_OK, and the existence of config space
> >>>>>> contents does not depend on FEATURES_OK.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The spec says:
> >>>>>> The device MUST allow reading of any device-specific
> >>>>>> configuration field
> >>>>>> before FEATURES_OK is set by the driver. This includes fields
> >>>>>> which are
> >>>>>> conditional on feature bits, as long as those feature bits are
> >>>>>> offered by the
> >>>>>> device.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Fixes: 30ef7a8ac8a07 (vdpa: Read device configuration only if
> >>>>>> FEATURES_OK)
> >>>>> Fix is fine, but fixes tag needs correction described below.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Above commit id is 13 letters should be 12.
> >>>>> And
> >>>>> It should be in format
> >>>>> Fixes: 30ef7a8ac8a0 ("vdpa: Read device configuration only if
> >>>>> FEATURES_OK")
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please use checkpatch.pl script before posting the patches to
> >>>>> catch these errors.
> >>>>> There is a bot that looks at the fixes tag and identifies the
> >>>>> right kernel version to apply this fix.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Zhu Lingshan<lingshan.zhu@...el.com>
> >>>>>> ---
> >>>>>>   drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c | 8 --------
> >>>>>>   1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c index
> >>>>>> 9b0e39b2f022..d76b22b2f7ae 100644
> >>>>>> --- a/drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c
> >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/vdpa/vdpa.c
> >>>>>> @@ -851,17 +851,9 @@ vdpa_dev_config_fill(struct vdpa_device *vdev,
> >>>>>> struct sk_buff *msg, u32 portid,  {
> >>>>>>       u32 device_id;
> >>>>>>       void *hdr;
> >>>>>> -    u8 status;
> >>>>>>       int err;
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>       down_read(&vdev->cf_lock);
> >>>>>> -    status = vdev->config->get_status(vdev);
> >>>>>> -    if (!(status & VIRTIO_CONFIG_S_FEATURES_OK)) {
> >>>>>> -        NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Features negotiation not
> >>>>>> completed");
> >>>>>> -        err = -EAGAIN;
> >>>>>> -        goto out;
> >>>>>> -    }
> >>>>>> -
> >>>>>>       hdr = genlmsg_put(msg, portid, seq, &vdpa_nl_family, flags,
> >>>>>>                 VDPA_CMD_DEV_CONFIG_GET);
> >>>>>>       if (!hdr) {
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> 2.31.1
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> Virtualization mailing list
> >>>>> Virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org
> >>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization__;!!ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ!Pkwym7OAjoDucUqs2fAwchxqL8-BGd6wOl-51xcgB_yCNwPJ_cs8A1y-cYmrLTB4OBNsimnZuqJPcvQIl3g$
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >
>

Powered by blists - more mailing lists