All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
To: Yunhong Jiang <yunhong.jiang@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] VFIO: Add a parameter to force nonthread IRQ
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 12:18:48 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1446056328.8018.422.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151028175013.GA21961@jnakajim-build>

On Wed, 2015-10-28 at 10:50 -0700, Yunhong Jiang wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 01:44:55AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 27/10/2015 22:26, Yunhong Jiang wrote:
> > >> > On RT kernels however can you call eventfd_signal from interrupt
> > >> > context?  You cannot call spin_lock_irqsave (which can sleep) from a
> > >> > non-threaded interrupt handler, can you?  You would need a raw spin lock.
> > > Thanks for pointing this out. Yes, we can't call spin_lock_irqsave on RT 
> > > kernel. Will do this way on next patch. But not sure if it's overkill to use 
> > > raw_spinlock there since the eventfd_signal is used by other caller also.
> > 
> > No, I don't think you can use raw_spinlock there.  The problem is not
> > just eventfd_signal, it is especially wake_up_locked_poll.  You cannot
> > convert the whole workqueue infrastructure to use raw_spinlock.
> 
> You mean the waitqueue, instead of workqueue, right? One choice is to change 
> the eventfd to use simple wait queue, which is raw_spinlock. But use simple 
> waitqueue on eventfd may in fact impact real time latency if not in this 
> scenario.
> 
> > 
> > Alex, would it make sense to use the IRQ bypass infrastructure always,
> > not just for VT-d, to do the MSI injection directly from the VFIO
> > interrupt handler and bypass the eventfd?  Basically this would add an
> > RCU-protected list of consumers matching the token to struct
> > irq_bypass_producer, and a
> > 
> > 	int (*inject)(struct irq_bypass_consumer *);
> > 
> > callback to struct irq_bypass_consumer.  If any callback returns true,
> > the eventfd is not signaled.  The KVM implementation would be like this
> > (compare with virt/kvm/eventfd.c):
> > 
> > 	/* Extracted out of irqfd_wakeup */
> > 	static int
> > 	irqfd_wakeup_pollin(struct kvm_kernel_irqfd *irqfd)
> > 	{
> > 		...
> > 	}
> > 
> > 	/* Extracted out of irqfd_wakeup */
> > 	static int
> > 	irqfd_wakeup_pollhup(struct kvm_kernel_irqfd *irqfd)
> > 	{
> > 		...
> > 	}
> > 
> > 	static int
> > 	irqfd_wakeup(wait_queue_t *wait, unsigned mode, int sync,
> > 		     void *key)
> > 	{
> > 	        struct _irqfd *irqfd = container_of(wait,
> > 			struct _irqfd, wait);
> > 	        unsigned long flags = (unsigned long)key;
> > 
> > 		if (flags & POLLIN)
> > 			irqfd_wakeup_pollin(irqfd);
> > 		if (flags & POLLHUP)
> > 			irqfd_wakeup_pollhup(irqfd);
> > 
> > 		return 0;
> > 	}
> > 
> > 	static int kvm_arch_irq_bypass_inject(
> > 		struct irq_bypass_consumer *cons)
> > 	{
> > 		struct kvm_kernel_irqfd *irqfd =
> > 			container_of(cons, struct kvm_kernel_irqfd,
> > 				     consumer);	
> > 
> > 		irqfd_wakeup_pollin(irqfd);
> > 	}
> > 
> This is a good idea IMHO. So for MSI interrupt, the 
> kvm_arch_irq_bypass_inject will be used, and the irqfd_wakeup will not be 
> invoked anymore, am I right?
> 
> I noticed the irq bypass manager is not merged yet, are there any git branch 
> for it?

It's in linux-next via the kvm.git next branch:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/virt/kvm/kvm.git

Thanks,
Alex

  reply	other threads:[~2015-10-28 18:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-10-27  1:20 [RFC PATCH] VFIO: Add a parameter to force nonthread IRQ Yunhong Jiang
2015-10-27  3:37 ` Alex Williamson
2015-10-27  6:35   ` Yunhong Jiang
2015-10-27  9:29     ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-10-27 21:26       ` Yunhong Jiang
2015-10-28  0:44         ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-10-28 16:00           ` Alex Williamson
2015-10-28 17:05             ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-10-28 23:54               ` Marcelo Tosatti
2015-10-29  3:11               ` Alex Williamson
2015-10-29  9:45                 ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-10-30  6:16                   ` Yunhong Jiang
2015-11-02  9:17                     ` Paolo Bonzini
2015-10-28 17:50           ` Yunhong Jiang
2015-10-28 18:18             ` Alex Williamson [this message]
2015-10-28 21:46               ` Yunhong Jiang
2015-10-28 18:28             ` Paolo Bonzini

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1446056328.8018.422.camel@redhat.com \
    --to=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=yunhong.jiang@linux.intel.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.