[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5] Fixes to Xen pciback for 3.17.
Wednesday, August 6, 2014, 9:39:16 PM, you wrote: > On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 09:25:59PM +0200, Sander Eikelenboom wrote: >> >> Wednesday, August 6, 2014, 9:18:31 PM, you wrote: >> >> > On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 08:59:59PM +0200, Sander Eikelenboom wrote: >> >> >> >> Tuesday, August 5, 2014, 4:04:43 PM, you wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> > Tuesday, August 5, 2014, 3:49:30 PM, you wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 11:44:33AM +0200, Sander Eikelenboom wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Tuesday, August 5, 2014, 11:31:08 AM, you wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> > On 05/08/14 09:44, Sander Eikelenboom wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> Monday, August 4, 2014, 8:43:18 PM, you wrote: >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 04:30:05PM +0100, David Vrabel wrote: >> >> >>> >>>> On 14/07/14 17:18, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: >> >> >>> >>>>> Greg: goto GHK >> >> >>> >>>>> >> >> >>> >>>>> This is v5 version of patches to fix some issues in Xen PCIback. >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> Applied to devel/for-linus-3.17. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> Thank you. >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> I dropped the stable Cc for #2 pending a final decision on >> >> >>> >>>> whether it >> >> >>> >>>> really is a stable candidate. >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >>> OK. >> >> >>> >>>> >> >> >>> >>>> David >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> Hi Konrad / David, >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> This series still lacks a resolution on the sysfs /do_flr /reset, >> >> >>> >> as a result the pci devices are not reset after shutdown of a >> >> >>> >> guest. >> >> >>> >> (no more pciback 0000:xx:xx.x: restoring config space at offset >> >> >>> >> xxx) >> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> >> So this series now introduces a regression to 3.16, which causes >> >> >>> >> devices to malfunction >> >> >>> >> after a guest reboot or after assigning the devices to another >> >> >>> >> guest. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> > I don't follow what you're saying. The lack of a device reset for >> >> >>> > PCI >> >> >>> > devices with no FLR method isn't a regression as this has never >> >> >>> > worked. >> >> >>> > Can you explain in more detail what the regression is and which >> >> >>> > patch >> >> >>> > caused it? >> >> >>> >> >> >>> I haven't bisected it to a specific patch in this series, >> >> >>> but this patch series (when pulled on top of 3.16) cause the >> >> >>> following: >> >> >>> >> >> >>> - Do a system start and HVM guest start >> >> >>> - HVM guest with pci passthrough, devices work fine >> >> >>> - shutdown the HVM guest >> >> >>> - "pciback 0000:xx:xx.x: restoring config space at offset xxx" >> >> >>> messages do not >> >> >>> appear anymore when shutting down the HVM guest (as they do with >> >> >>> vanilla 3.16) >> >> >>> - Starting the HVM guest again with the same devices passed through. >> >> >>> - Devices malfunction (for example a USB host controller will fail a >> >> >>> simple >> >> >>> "lsusb" >> >> >>> - And this all works fine on vanilla 3.16. >> >> >> >> >> Hm, the only patch that makes code changes is >> >> >> 63fc5ec97cc54257d1c4ee49ed2131f754a5ff9b >> >> >> "xen/pciback: Don't deadlock when unbinding." >> >> >> but it does not change any of that code path. Only figures out whether >> >> >> to take a lock or not. >> >> >> >> > Ok and the do_flr nack by david is unrelated to this part (i didn't >> >> > check just >> >> > assumed there could be a connection) >> >> >> >> >> I will try it out on my box and see if I can reproduce it. >> >> >> >> >> And just to be 100% sure - you are using vanilla Xen? No changes on top >> >> >> of it? >> >> >> >> > Except the fix from jan for the pirq/msi stuff (and an unrelated hpet >> >> > one), other than that no. >> >> > If you can't reproduce i will see if i can dive deeper into it tonight ! >> >> >> >> Hi Konrad, >> >> >> >> It looks like the issues is this part of the change: >> >> >> >> --- a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/pci_stub.c >> >> +++ b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/pci_stub.c >> >> @@ -250,6 +250,8 @@ struct pci_dev *pcistub_get_pci_dev(struct >> >> xen_pcibk_device *pdev, >> >> * - 'echo BDF > unbind' with a guest still using it. See >> >> pcistub_remove >> >> * >> >> * As such we have to be careful. >> >> + * >> >> + * To make this easier, the caller has to hold the device lock. >> >> */ >> >> void pcistub_put_pci_dev(struct pci_dev *dev) >> >> { >> >> @@ -276,11 +278,8 @@ void pcistub_put_pci_dev(struct pci_dev *dev) >> >> /* Cleanup our device >> >> * (so it's ready for the next domain) >> >> */ >> >> - >> >> - /* This is OK - we are running from workqueue context >> >> - * and want to inhibit the user from fiddling with 'reset' >> >> - */ >> >> - pci_reset_function(dev); >> >> + lockdep_assert_held(&dev->dev.mutex); >> >> + __pci_reset_function_locked(dev); >> >> pci_restore_state(dev); >> >> /* This disables the device. */ >> >> >> >> More specifically: >> >> The old "pci_reset_function(dev)" potentially seems to do much more than >> >> __pci_reset_function_locked(dev). >> >> >> >> >> >> "__pci_reset_function_locked(dev)" only calls "__pci_dev_reset" >> >> while "pci_reset_function" not only calls pci_dev_reset, but on succes >> >> it also calls: "pci_dev_save_and_disable" which does a save state etc. >> >> >> >> >> >> So i added a little more debug: >> >> >> >> device_lock_assert(&dev->dev); >> >> ret = __pci_reset_function_locked(dev); >> >> dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "%s __pci_reset_function_locked:%d >> >> dev->state_saved:%d\n", __func__, ret, (!dev->state_saved) ? 0 : 1 ); >> >> pci_restore_state(dev); >> >> >> >> And this returns: >> >> [ 494.570579] pciback 0000:04:00.0: pcistub_put_pci_dev >> >> __pci_reset_function_locked:0 dev->state_saved:0 >> >> >> >> So that confirms there is no saved_state to get restored by >> >> pci_restore_state(dev) in the next line. >> >> >> >> However there seems to be no "locked" variant of the function >> >> "pci_reset_function" in pci.c that has all the same logic ... >> >> > Yup. I've a preliminary patch: >> >> Preliminary in the sense: "this should fix it .. needs more testing" ? > This should fix it, albeit the fix has a disastrous flaw. Here is the proper > version: > From 00a5b6e3c9ee2c2d605879bdaebc627fa640b024 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 16:21:32 -0400 > Subject: [PATCH] xen/pciback: Restore configuration space when detaching from > a guest. > The commit 9eea3f7695226f9af9992cebf8e98ac0ad78b277 > "xen/pciback: Don't deadlock when unbinding." was using > the version of pci_reset_function which would lock the device lock. > That is no good as we can dead-lock. As such we swapped to using > the lock-less version and requiring that the callers > of 'pcistub_put_pci_dev' take the device lock. And as such > this bug got exposed. > Using the lock-less version is OK, except that we tried to > use 'pci_restore_state' after the lock-less version of > __pci_reset_function_locked - which won't work as 'state_saved' > is set to false. Said 'state_saved' is a toggle boolean that > is to be used by the sequence of a) pci_save_state/pci_restore_state > or b) pci_load_and_free_saved_state/pci_restore_state. We don't > want to use a) as the guest might have messed up the PCI > configuration space and we want it to revert to the state > when the PCI device was binded to us. Therefore we pick > b) to restore the configuration space. > To still retain the PCI configuration space, we save it once > more and store it on our private copy to be restored when: > - Device is unbinded from pciback > - Device is detached from a guest. > Reported-by: Sander Eikelenboom <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/xen/xen-pciback/pci_stub.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++---- > 1 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > diff --git a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/pci_stub.c > b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/pci_stub.c > index 1ddd22f..8cf7f2b 100644 > --- a/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/pci_stub.c > +++ b/drivers/xen/xen-pciback/pci_stub.c > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ static void pcistub_device_release(struct kref *kref) > */ > __pci_reset_function_locked(dev); > if (pci_load_and_free_saved_state(dev, &dev_data->pci_saved_state)) > - dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "Could not reload PCI state\n"); > + dev_info(&dev->dev, "Could not reload PCI state\n"); > else > pci_restore_state(dev); > > @@ -257,6 +257,7 @@ void pcistub_put_pci_dev(struct pci_dev *dev) > { > struct pcistub_device *psdev, *found_psdev = NULL; > unsigned long flags; > + struct xen_pcibk_dev_data *dev_data; > > spin_lock_irqsave(&pcistub_devices_lock, flags); > > @@ -279,9 +280,25 @@ void pcistub_put_pci_dev(struct pci_dev *dev) > * (so it's ready for the next domain) > */ > device_lock_assert(&dev->dev); > - __pci_reset_function_locked(dev); > - pci_restore_state(dev); > - > + dev_data = pci_get_drvdata(dev); > + if (pci_load_and_free_saved_state(dev, &dev_data->pci_saved_state)) > + dev_info(&dev->dev, "Could not reload PCI state\n"); > + else { > + __pci_reset_function_locked(dev); > + /* > + * The usual sequence is pci_save_state & pci_restore_state > + * but the guest might have messed the configuration space up. > + * Use the initial version (when device was binded to us). > + */ > + pci_restore_state(dev); > + /* > + * The next steps are to reload the configuration for the > + * next time we bind & unbind to a guest - or unload from > + * pciback. > + */ > + pci_save_state(dev); > + dev_data->pci_saved_state = pci_store_saved_state(dev); > + } > /* This disables the device. */ > xen_pcibk_reset_device(dev); > Is it save to have "__pci_reset_function_locked(dev)" to be conditional on succes of "pci_load_and_free_saved_state" ? Or is it safer because you don't reset the device although it's in an unknown state (and resetting it while it's back to dom0 could lead to more problems ?) _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |