[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v5 1/3] xen/pt: fix some pass-thru devices don't work across reboot
>>> On 22.01.19 at 17:08, <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 22, 2019 at 01:24:48AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 22.01.19 at 06:50, <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 11:38:23AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote: >>>>On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 04:17:30PM +0800, Chao Gao wrote: >>>>> @@ -1529,6 +1591,8 @@ int deassign_device(struct domain *d, u16 seg, u8 >>>>> bus, > u8 devfn) >>>>> if ( !pdev ) >>>>> return -ENODEV; >>>>> >>>>> + pci_unmap_msi(pdev); >>>> >>>>Just want to make sure, since deassign_device will be called for both >>>>PV and HVM domains. AFAICT pci_unmap_msi is safe to call when the >>>>device is assigned to a PV guest, but would like your confirmation. >>> >>> Tested with a PV guest loaded by Pygrub. PV guest doesn't suffer the >>> msi-x issue I want to fix. >>> >>> With these three patches applied, I got some error messages from Xen >>> and Dom0 as follow: >>> >>> (XEN) irq.c:2176: dom3: forcing unbind of pirq 332 >>> (XEN) irq.c:2176: dom3: forcing unbind of pirq 331 >>> (XEN) irq.c:2176: dom3: forcing unbind of pirq 328 >>> (XEN) irq.c:2148: dom3: pirq 359 not mapped >>> [ 2887.067685] xen:events: unmap irq failed -22 >>> (XEN) irq.c:2148: dom3: pirq 358 not mapped >>> [ 2887.075917] xen:events: unmap irq failed -22 >>> (XEN) irq.c:2148: dom3: pirq 357 not mapped >>> >>> It seems, the cause of such error is that pirq-s are unmapped and forcibly >>> unbound on deassignment; subsequent unmapping pirq issued by dom0 fail. >>> From some aspects, this error is expected. Because with this patch, >>> pirq-s are expected to be mapped by qemu or dom0 kernel (for pv case) before >>> deassignment and mapping/binding pirq after deassignment should fail. >>> >>> So what's your opinion on handling such error? We should figure out another >>> method to fix msi-x issue to avoid such error or suppress these errors in >>> qemu and linux kernel? >> >>The "forcing unbind" ones are probably fine to leave alone, but >>the errors would better be avoided in Xen (i.e. without a need >>to also change qemu and/or Linux). Since you don't really say >>when / why these errors now surface, it's hard to suggest what >>might be best to do. > > With these patches applied, these errors surface in three cases: > 1. destroy the PV guest with assigned devices by "xl destroy" > 2. hot-unplug a assigned device from the PV guest > 3. shut down the PV guest by executing "init 0" in guest (only for some > devices whose driver doesn't clean up MSI-x when shutdown) > > The reason is: > when detaching a device from a domain, Toolstack always calls > xc_deassign_device() prior to libxl__device_pci_remove_xenstore(). > The latter notifies xen_pciback to clean up the pci devices. I guess > unbinding and unmapping pirq are steps of the cleanup (just like > qemu's role in device deassignment for HVM guest). But in this patch, > pirqs are forcibly unmapped when calling xc_deassign_device(). Thus when > xen_pciback tries to unmap pirqs as usual, xen reports this pirq isn't > mapped and propagates this error to xen_pciback. Why are you talking about pciback here? I don't think it plays any role in IRQ unmapping. If what the tool stack does if going to be fully taen care of by the hypervisor, I think that tool stack code could the be deleted (unless compatibility requirements don't allow doing so, in which case it could be conditionally bypassed). Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |