[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3] blkif: reconcile protocol specification with in-use implementations


  • To: Roger Pau Monne <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>, Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>, Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 14:06:23 +0200
  • Autocrypt: addr=jbeulich@xxxxxxxx; keydata= xsDiBFk3nEQRBADAEaSw6zC/EJkiwGPXbWtPxl2xCdSoeepS07jW8UgcHNurfHvUzogEq5xk hu507c3BarVjyWCJOylMNR98Yd8VqD9UfmX0Hb8/BrA+Hl6/DB/eqGptrf4BSRwcZQM32aZK 7Pj2XbGWIUrZrd70x1eAP9QE3P79Y2oLrsCgbZJfEwCgvz9JjGmQqQkRiTVzlZVCJYcyGGsD /0tbFCzD2h20ahe8rC1gbb3K3qk+LpBtvjBu1RY9drYk0NymiGbJWZgab6t1jM7sk2vuf0Py O9Hf9XBmK0uE9IgMaiCpc32XV9oASz6UJebwkX+zF2jG5I1BfnO9g7KlotcA/v5ClMjgo6Gl MDY4HxoSRu3i1cqqSDtVlt+AOVBJBACrZcnHAUSuCXBPy0jOlBhxPqRWv6ND4c9PH1xjQ3NP nxJuMBS8rnNg22uyfAgmBKNLpLgAGVRMZGaGoJObGf72s6TeIqKJo/LtggAS9qAUiuKVnygo 3wjfkS9A3DRO+SpU7JqWdsveeIQyeyEJ/8PTowmSQLakF+3fote9ybzd880fSmFuIEJldWxp Y2ggPGpiZXVsaWNoQHN1c2UuY29tPsJgBBMRAgAgBQJZN5xEAhsDBgsJCAcDAgQVAggDBBYC AwECHgECF4AACgkQoDSui/t3IH4J+wCfQ5jHdEjCRHj23O/5ttg9r9OIruwAn3103WUITZee e7Sbg12UgcQ5lv7SzsFNBFk3nEQQCACCuTjCjFOUdi5Nm244F+78kLghRcin/awv+IrTcIWF hUpSs1Y91iQQ7KItirz5uwCPlwejSJDQJLIS+QtJHaXDXeV6NI0Uef1hP20+y8qydDiVkv6l IreXjTb7DvksRgJNvCkWtYnlS3mYvQ9NzS9PhyALWbXnH6sIJd2O9lKS1Mrfq+y0IXCP10eS FFGg+Av3IQeFatkJAyju0PPthyTqxSI4lZYuJVPknzgaeuJv/2NccrPvmeDg6Coe7ZIeQ8Yj t0ARxu2xytAkkLCel1Lz1WLmwLstV30g80nkgZf/wr+/BXJW/oIvRlonUkxv+IbBM3dX2OV8 AmRv1ySWPTP7AAMFB/9PQK/VtlNUJvg8GXj9ootzrteGfVZVVT4XBJkfwBcpC/XcPzldjv+3 HYudvpdNK3lLujXeA5fLOH+Z/G9WBc5pFVSMocI71I8bT8lIAzreg0WvkWg5V2WZsUMlnDL9 mpwIGFhlbM3gfDMs7MPMu8YQRFVdUvtSpaAs8OFfGQ0ia3LGZcjA6Ik2+xcqscEJzNH+qh8V m5jjp28yZgaqTaRbg3M/+MTbMpicpZuqF4rnB0AQD12/3BNWDR6bmh+EkYSMcEIpQmBM51qM EKYTQGybRCjpnKHGOxG0rfFY1085mBDZCH5Kx0cl0HVJuQKC+dV2ZY5AqjcKwAxpE75MLFkr wkkEGBECAAkFAlk3nEQCGwwACgkQoDSui/t3IH7nnwCfcJWUDUFKdCsBH/E5d+0ZnMQi+G0A nAuWpQkjM1ASeQwSHEeAWPgskBQL
  • Cc: Paul Durrant <paul@xxxxxxx>, Owen Smith <owen.smith@xxxxxxxxx>, Mark Syms <mark.syms@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stefano Stabellini <sstabellini@xxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Delivery-date: Thu, 12 Sep 2024 12:06:29 +0000
  • List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xenproject.org>

On 12.09.2024 11:57, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> Current blkif implementations (both backends and frontends) have all slight
> differences about how they handle the 'sector-size' xenstore node, and how
> other fields are derived from this value or hardcoded to be expressed in units
> of 512 bytes.
> 
> To give some context, this is an excerpt of how different implementations use
> the value in 'sector-size' as the base unit for to other fields rather than
> just to set the logical sector size of the block device:
> 
>                         │ sectors xenbus node │ requests sector_number │ 
> requests {first,last}_sect
> ────────────────────────┼─────────────────────┼────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────
> FreeBSD blk{front,back} │     sector-size     │      sector-size       │      
>      512
> ────────────────────────┼─────────────────────┼────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────
> Linux blk{front,back}   │         512         │          512           │      
>      512
> ────────────────────────┼─────────────────────┼────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────
> QEMU blkback            │     sector-size     │      sector-size       │      
>  sector-size
> ────────────────────────┼─────────────────────┼────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────
> Windows blkfront        │     sector-size     │      sector-size       │      
>  sector-size
> ────────────────────────┼─────────────────────┼────────────────────────┼───────────────────────────
> MiniOS                  │     sector-size     │          512           │      
>      512
> 
> An attempt was made by 67e1c050e36b in order to change the base units of the
> request fields and the xenstore 'sectors' node.  That however only lead to 
> more
> confusion, as the specification now clearly diverged from the reference
> implementation in Linux.  Such change was only implemented for QEMU Qdisk
> and Windows PV blkfront.
> 
> Partially revert to the state before 67e1c050e36b while adjusting the
> documentation for 'sectors' to match what it used to be previous to
> 2fa701e5346d:
> 
>  * Declare 'feature-large-sector-size' deprecated.  Frontends should not 
> expose
>    the node, backends should not make decisions based on its presence.
> 
>  * Clarify that 'sectors' xenstore node and the requests fields are always in
>    512-byte units, like it was previous to 2fa701e5346d and 67e1c050e36b.
> 
> All base units for the fields used in the protocol are 512-byte based, the
> xenbus 'sector-size' field is only used to signal the logic block size.  When
> 'sector-size' is greater than 512, blkfront implementations must make sure 
> that
> the offsets and sizes (despite being expressed in 512-byte units) are aligned
> to the logical block size specified in 'sector-size', otherwise the backend
> will fail to process the requests.
> 
> This will require changes to some of the frontends and backends in order to
> properly support 'sector-size' nodes greater than 512.
> 
> Fixes: 2fa701e5346d ('blkif.h: Provide more complete documentation of the 
> blkif interface')
> Fixes: 67e1c050e36b ('public/io/blkif.h: try to fix the semantics of sector 
> based quantities')
> Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Juergen Gross <jgross@xxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>

The Fixes: tags generally suggest this wants backporting. I'm a little uncertain
here though, as it won't really affect anything that is built. Opinions?

Jan



 


Rackspace

Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our
servers 24x7x365 and backed by RackSpace's Fanatical Support®.