On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 at 09:50, Michael S. Tsirkin <m...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 09:46:06AM +0100, Stefano Garzarella wrote:
> > Hi Cindy,
> >
> > On Wed, 26 Feb 2025 at 07:14, Cindy Lu <l...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 25, 2025 at 7:31 PM Stefano Garzarella <sgarz...@redhat.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Feb 23, 2025 at 11:36:20PM +0800, Cindy Lu wrote:
> > > > >Add a new UAPI to enable setting the vhost device to task mode.
> > > > >The userspace application can use VHOST_SET_INHERIT_FROM_OWNER
> > > > >to configure the mode if necessary.
> > > > >This setting must be applied before VHOST_SET_OWNER, as the worker
> > > > >will be created in the VHOST_SET_OWNER function
> > > > >
> > > > >Signed-off-by: Cindy Lu <l...@redhat.com>
> > > > >---
> > > > > drivers/vhost/vhost.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > > > > include/uapi/linux/vhost.h | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > > >
> > > > >diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> > > > >index d8c0ea118bb1..45d8f5c5bca9 100644
> > > > >--- a/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> > > > >+++ b/drivers/vhost/vhost.c
> > > > >@@ -1133,7 +1133,7 @@ void vhost_dev_reset_owner(struct vhost_dev
> > > > >*dev, struct vhost_iotlb *umem)
> > > > > int i;
> > > > >
> > > > > vhost_dev_cleanup(dev);
> > > > >-
> > > > >+ dev->inherit_owner = true;
> > > > > dev->umem = umem;
> > > > > /* We don't need VQ locks below since vhost_dev_cleanup makes
> > > > > sure
> > > > > * VQs aren't running.
> > > > >@@ -2278,15 +2278,35 @@ long vhost_dev_ioctl(struct vhost_dev *d,
> > > > >unsigned int ioctl, void __user *argp)
> > > > > {
> > > > > struct eventfd_ctx *ctx;
> > > > > u64 p;
> > > > >- long r;
> > > > >+ long r = 0;
> > > > > int i, fd;
> > > > >+ u8 inherit_owner;
> > > > >
> > > > > /* If you are not the owner, you can become one */
> > > > > if (ioctl == VHOST_SET_OWNER) {
> > > > > r = vhost_dev_set_owner(d);
> > > > > goto done;
> > > > > }
> > > > >+ if (ioctl == VHOST_FORK_FROM_OWNER) {
> > > > >+ /*inherit_owner can only be modified before owner is
> > > > >set*/
> > > > >+ if (vhost_dev_has_owner(d)) {
> > > > >+ r = -EBUSY;
> > > > >+ goto done;
> > > > >+ }
> > > > >+ if (copy_from_user(&inherit_owner, argp, sizeof(u8))) {
> > > > >+ r = -EFAULT;
> > > > >+ goto done;
> > > > >+ }
> > > > >+ /* Validate the inherit_owner value, ensuring it is
> > > > >either 0 or 1 */
> > > > >+ if (inherit_owner > 1) {
> > > > >+ r = -EINVAL;
> > > > >+ goto done;
> > > > >+ }
> > > > >+
> > > > >+ d->inherit_owner = (bool)inherit_owner;
> > > > >
> > > > >+ goto done;
> > > > >+ }
> > > > > /* You must be the owner to do anything else */
> > > > > r = vhost_dev_check_owner(d);
> > > > > if (r)
> > > > >diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/vhost.h b/include/uapi/linux/vhost.h
> > > > >index b95dd84eef2d..8f558b433536 100644
> > > > >--- a/include/uapi/linux/vhost.h
> > > > >+++ b/include/uapi/linux/vhost.h
> > > > >@@ -235,4 +235,22 @@
> > > > > */
> > > > > #define VHOST_VDPA_GET_VRING_SIZE _IOWR(VHOST_VIRTIO, 0x82,
> > > > > \
> > > > > struct vhost_vring_state)
> > > > >+
> > > > >+/**
> > > > >+ * VHOST_FORK_FROM_OWNER - Set the inherit_owner flag for the vhost
> > > > >device
> > > > >+ *
> > > > >+ * @param inherit_owner: An 8-bit value that determines the vhost
> > > > >thread mode
> > > > >+ *
> > > > >+ * When inherit_owner is set to 1:
> > > > >+ * - The VHOST worker threads inherit its values/checks from
> > > > >+ * the thread that owns the VHOST device, The vhost threads will
> > > > >+ * be counted in the nproc rlimits.
> > > > >+ *
> > > > >+ * When inherit_owner is set to 0:
> > > > >+ * - The VHOST worker threads will use the traditional kernel
> > > > >thread (kthread)
> > > > >+ * implementation, which may be preferred by older userspace
> > > > >applications that
> > > > >+ * do not utilize the newer vhost_task concept.
> > > > >+ */
> > > > >+#define VHOST_FORK_FROM_OWNER _IOW(VHOST_VIRTIO, 0x83, __u8)
> > > >
> > > > I don't think we really care of the size of the parameter, so can we
> > > > just use `bool` or `unsigned int` or `int` for this IOCTL?
> > > >
> > > > As we did for other IOCTLs where we had to enable/disable something (e.g
> > > > VHOST_VSOCK_SET_RUNNING, VHOST_VDPA_SET_VRING_ENABLE).
> > > >
> > > hi Stefano
> > > I initially used it as a boolean, but during the code review, the
> > > maintainers considered it was unsuitable for the bool use as the
> >
> > I see, indeed I found only 1 case of bool:
> >
> > include/uapi/misc/xilinx_sdfec.h:#define XSDFEC_SET_BYPASS
> > _IOW(XSDFEC_MAGIC, 9, bool)
> >
> > > interface in ioctl (I think in version 3 ?). So I changed it to u8,
> > > then will check if this is 1/0 in ioctl and the u8 should be
> > > sufficient for us to use
> >
> > Okay, if Michael and Jason are happy with it, it's fine.
> > It just seemed strange to me that for other IOCTLs we use int or
> > unsigned int when we need a boolean instead of a sized type.
>
> I only found VHOST_VSOCK_SET_RUNNING. which other ioctls?
VHOST_VDPA_SET_VRING_ENABLE use the `struct vhost_vring_state` where we
use the `unsigned int num` field as boolean, but I see that this is a
special case where we re-use the same struct for multiple ioctls.
Thanks,
Stefano
