On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 15:55:44 +0800, Jason Wang <jasow...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> 在 2022/3/8 下午8:35, Xuan Zhuo 写道:
> > virtio ring supports reset.
> >
> > Queue reset is divided into several stages.
> >
> > 1. notify device queue reset
> > 2. vring release
> > 3. attach new vring
> > 4. notify device queue re-enable
> >
> > After the first step is completed, the vring reset operation can be
> > performed. If the newly set vring num does not change, then just reset
> > the vq related value.
> >
> > Otherwise, the vring will be released and the vring will be reallocated.
> > And the vring will be attached to the vq. If this process fails, the
> > function will exit, and the state of the vq will be the vring release
> > state. You can call this function again to reallocate the vring.
> >
> > In addition, vring_align, may_reduce_num are necessary for reallocating
> > vring, so they are retained when creating vq.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Xuan Zhuo <xuanz...@linux.alibaba.com>
> > ---
> > drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 69 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > index e0422c04c903..148fb1fd3d5a 100644
> > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > @@ -158,6 +158,12 @@ struct vring_virtqueue {
> > /* DMA address and size information */
> > dma_addr_t queue_dma_addr;
> > size_t queue_size_in_bytes;
> > +
> > + /* The parameters for creating vrings are reserved for
> > + * creating new vrings when enabling reset queue.
> > + */
> > + u32 vring_align;
> > + bool may_reduce_num;
> > } split;
> >
> > /* Available for packed ring */
> > @@ -217,6 +223,12 @@ struct vring_virtqueue {
> > #endif
> > };
> >
> > +static void vring_free(struct virtqueue *vq);
> > +static void __vring_virtqueue_init_split(struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > + struct virtio_device *vdev);
> > +static int __vring_virtqueue_attach_split(struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > + struct virtio_device *vdev,
> > + struct vring vring);
> >
> > /*
> > * Helpers.
> > @@ -1012,6 +1024,8 @@ static struct virtqueue *vring_create_virtqueue_split(
> > return NULL;
> > }
> >
> > + to_vvq(vq)->split.vring_align = vring_align;
> > + to_vvq(vq)->split.may_reduce_num = may_reduce_num;
> > to_vvq(vq)->split.queue_dma_addr = vring.dma_addr;
> > to_vvq(vq)->split.queue_size_in_bytes = vring.queue_size_in_bytes;
> > to_vvq(vq)->we_own_ring = true;
> > @@ -1019,6 +1033,59 @@ static struct virtqueue
> > *vring_create_virtqueue_split(
> > return vq;
> > }
> >
> > +static int virtqueue_reset_vring_split(struct virtqueue *_vq, u32 num)
> > +{
>
>
> So what this function does is to resize the virtqueue actually, I
> suggest to rename it as virtqueue_resize_split().
OK.
>
>
> > + struct vring_virtqueue *vq = to_vvq(_vq);
> > + struct virtio_device *vdev = _vq->vdev;
> > + struct vring_split vring;
> > + int err;
> > +
> > + if (num > _vq->num_max)
> > + return -E2BIG;
> > +
> > + switch (vq->vq.reset) {
> > + case VIRTIO_VQ_RESET_STEP_NONE:
> > + return -ENOENT;
> > +
> > + case VIRTIO_VQ_RESET_STEP_VRING_ATTACH:
> > + case VIRTIO_VQ_RESET_STEP_DEVICE:
> > + if (vq->split.vring.num == num || !num)
> > + break;
> > +
> > + vring_free(_vq);
> > +
> > + fallthrough;
> > +
> > + case VIRTIO_VQ_RESET_STEP_VRING_RELEASE:
> > + if (!num)
> > + num = vq->split.vring.num;
> > +
> > + err = vring_create_vring_split(&vring, vdev,
> > + vq->split.vring_align,
> > + vq->weak_barriers,
> > + vq->split.may_reduce_num, num);
> > + if (err)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
>
>
> We'd better need a safe fallback here like:
>
> If we can't allocate new memory, we can keep using the current one.
> Otherwise an ethtool -G fail may make the device not usable.
>
> This could be done by not freeing the old vring and virtqueue states
> until new is allocated.
I've been thinking the same thing for the past two days.
>
>
> > +
> > + err = __vring_virtqueue_attach_split(vq, vdev, vring.vring);
> > + if (err) {
> > + vring_free_queue(vdev, vring.queue_size_in_bytes,
> > + vring.queue,
> > + vring.dma_addr);
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > + }
> > +
> > + vq->split.queue_dma_addr = vring.dma_addr;
> > + vq->split.queue_size_in_bytes = vring.queue_size_in_bytes;
> > + }
> > +
> > + __vring_virtqueue_init_split(vq, vdev);
> > + vq->we_own_ring = true;
>
>
> This seems wrong, we have the transport (rproc/mlxtbf) that allocate the
> vring by themselves. I think we need to fail the resize for we_own_ring
> == false.
Oh, it turns out that we_own_ring is for this purpose.
Thanks.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
> > + vq->vq.reset = VIRTIO_VQ_RESET_STEP_VRING_ATTACH;
> > +
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> >
> > /*
> > * Packed ring specific functions - *_packed().
> > @@ -2317,6 +2384,8 @@ static int __vring_virtqueue_attach_split(struct
> > vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > static void __vring_virtqueue_init_split(struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > struct virtio_device *vdev)
> > {
> > + vq->vq.reset = VIRTIO_VQ_RESET_STEP_NONE;
> > +
> > vq->packed_ring = false;
> > vq->we_own_ring = false;
> > vq->broken = false;
>
_______________________________________________
linux-um mailing list
linux-um@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-um
