lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [virtio-dev] RE: [PATCH v1 0/2] Virtio: fix some vq allocation issues
On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 16:59:19 +0100
Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 14:23:38 +0100
> Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 10:53:14 +0100
> > Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 1 Jan 2019 00:40:19 +0100
> > > Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> > > > AFAICT tweaking the balloon code may be simpler than tweaking the
> > > > virtio-ccw (transport code). ccw_io_helper() relies on getting
> > > > an interrupt when the issued IO is done. If virtio-ccw is buggy, it
> > > > needs to be fixed, but I'm not sure it is.
> > >
> > > I would not call virtio-ccw buggy, but it has some constraints that
> > > virtio-pci apparently doesn't have (and which did not show up so far;
> > > e.g. virtio-blk schedules a work item on config change, so there's no
> > > deadlock there.)
> > >
> > > One way to get out of that constraint (don't interact with the config
> > > space directly in the config changed handler) would be to schedule a
> > > work item in virtio-ccw that calls virtio_config_changed() for the
> > > device. My understanding is that delaying the notification to a work
> > > queue would be fine.
> >
> > Unfortunately, calling virtio_config_changed() from a work item is not
> > enough: That function takes the config_lock, and the virtio-ccw code to
> > get the config both needs to allocate some memory and call schedule :/
> >
> > The best option really seems to be
> > - have virtio-balloon move the handling of the config change onto a
> > workqueue or something like that, and
> > - document that you cannot read/write the virtio config space from an
> > atomic context
> >
> > Unless someone has a better idea?
> >
>
> I wonder, would making config_lock a mutex suffice?

Unless I'm mistaken, you can't take a mutex in an interrupt path.

> I've already hinted that a virtio-balloon side fix is probably the
> simpler variant.

Yes, I think so as well.

> I agree, let's fix the regression first, and think about wether to teach
> virtio-ccw to allow config manipulation from virtio_config_changed() or
> not later.

Or whether we can tweak the virtio code instead. But I agree, let's get
things working again first.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-02 19:03    [W:0.078 / U:1.760 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site