Re: [RFC PATCH 4/5] APIC/IOAPIC EOI callback

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 02:03:34PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 22:23 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 01:21:18PM -0600, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 21:54 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 09:30:59PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > > > On 07/11/2010 09:26 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > >On Sun, 2010-07-11 at 21:14 +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> > > > > >>On 07/11/2010 09:09 PM, Alex Williamson wrote:
> > > > > >>>For device assignment, we need to know when the VM writes an end
> > > > > >>>of interrupt to the APIC, which allows us to de-assert the interrupt
> > > > > >>>line and clear the DisINTx bit.  Add a new wrapper for ioapic
> > > > > >>>generated interrupts with a callback on eoi and create an interface
> > > > > >>>for drivers to be notified on eoi.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>You aren't going to get this with kvm's in-kernel irqchip, so we need a
> > > > > >>new interface there.
> > > > > >Registering an eventfd for the eoi seems like a reasonable alternative.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm worried about that racing (with what?)
> > > > 
> > > > With device asserting the interrupt?
> > > > Need to make sure that all possible scenarious work well:
> > > > 
> > > > 	device asserts interrupt
> > > > 	driver clears interrupt
> > > > 	device asserts interrupt
> > > > 	eoi
> > > > 
> > > > 	device asserts interrupt
> > > > 	driver clears interrupt
> > > > 	eoi
> > > > 	device asserts interrupt
> > > > 
> > > > etc
> > > > 
> > > > Not that I see issues, these are things we need to check.
> > > 
> > > I think those are all protected by host and qemu vfio drivers managing
> > > DisINTx.  The way I understand it to work now is:
> > > 
> > > 	device asserts interrupt
> > > 	interrupt lands in host vfio driver
> > > 	host vfio sets DisINTx on the device
> > > 	host vfio sends eventfd
> > > 	eventfd lands in qemu vfio, does a qemu_set_irq
> > >         ... guest processes
> > > 	guest writes eoi to apic, lands back in qemu vfio driver
> > > 	qemu vfio deasserts qemu interrupt
> > > 	qemu vfio clears DisINTx
> > > 
> > > So I don't think there's a race as long as ordering is sane for toggling
> > > DisINTx.  Thanks,
> > > 
> > > Alex
> > > 
> > 
> > What about threaded interrupts? I think (correct me if I am wrong)
> > that they work like this:
> > 
> >  	device asserts interrupt
> > 	guest disables interrupt
> 
> Is this the guest manipulating DisINTx itself?  I suppose it could be a
> device dependent disable as well.

It can manipulate it, so we need to virtualize it, but that's a
separate issue.

> >  	eoi
> > 	guest enables interrupt
> >  	driver clears interrupt
> 
> These two are hopefully reversed or else the driver is expecting to
> clear and potentially reassert interrupts anyway.

Yes. Sorry.

> >  	device asserts interrupt
> > 
> > If so, your code will clear DisINTx immediately which
> > will always get us another host interrupt:
> > performance will be hurt. I am also not sure
> > we'll not lose interrupts.
> 
> Level interrupts are lossy afaik, if it gets cleared but an interrupt
> condition still exists, it should be reasserted.

Yes but I mean we won't interrupt the guest. So it wil lstay disabled
forever.

> > It seems we need to track interrupt disable/enable as well, and only
> > clear DisINTx after eoi with interrupts enabled.  Not sure what is the
> > interface for this.
> 
> If a driver uses device dependent code to disable interrupts,
> there's no
> issue, we'll clear DisINTx, but the device still won't generate an
> interrupt until the dependent code is re-enabled by the guest (assuming
> there's no cross talk between DisINTx and device dependent components).
> 
> For the case that a guest driver disables via DisINTx, it seems easy to
> trap and track that.  So we get:
> 
>         device asserts interrupt
>         guest disables interrupt
>         (trapped, qemu-vfio sets intx.guest_disabled = 1)
>         eoi
>         (qemu-vfio deasserts qemu interrupts, but because of above doesn't clear DisINTx)
>         guest enables interrupt
>         (allowed to pass through, intx.guest_disabled = 0)
>         driver clears interrupt
>         device asserts interrupt
> 
> I've already got an intx.pending bit, so I think this just changes the eoi to:
> 
>     vdev->intx.pending = 0;
>     qemu_set_irq(vdev->pdev.irq[vdev->intx.pin], 0);
>     if (!vdev->intx.guest_disabled) {
>         vfio_unmask_intx(vdev);
>     }
> 
> Writing the command register DisINTx bit then just gets some kind of:
> 
>     if (cmd & PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE && intx.pending) {
>         intx.guest_disabled = 1;
>         cmd &= ~PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE;
>     } else if (!(cmd & PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE) && intx.guest_disabled) {
>         intx.guest_disabled = 0;
>     }
>     ... allow write
> 
> That work?  Thanks,
> 
> Alex

No, I mean guest OS disables the specific interrupt with
disable_irq.

-- 
MST