From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44252) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJiVC-0003t1-0N for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 11:12:55 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJiV8-0002xK-Pl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 11:12:53 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:40692) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eJiV8-0002xB-JK for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 11:12:50 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC81180477 for ; Tue, 28 Nov 2017 16:12:49 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 18:12:44 +0200 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Message-ID: <20171128181150-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20171128133123.17372-1-vkaplans@redhat.com> <20171128160420.GG2318@work-vm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171128160420.GG2318@work-vm> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] vhost-user spec: Clarify policy on setting log_base List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Cc: Victor Kaplansky , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Maxime Coquelin On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 04:04:21PM +0000, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > * Victor Kaplansky (vkaplans@redhat.com) wrote: > > From: Victor Kaplansky > > > > If we allow qemu to change logging area after it was already established, > > it may require from the backend to acquire a lock on each access to > > the log_base, which has a potential quite a big performance hit. > > > > Thus we would like to clarify in the spec, that qemu is not expected > > to resize or remap the logging area, and backend implementations > > can safely ignore subsequent requests to log_base modifications. > > There's quite a bit of code in vhost to cope with changes in mappings > of regions; and there's already code in there to handle log size > changes: > > static inline void vhost_dev_log_resize(struct vhost_dev *dev, uint64_t size) > { > struct vhost_log *log = vhost_log_get(size, vhost_dev_log_is_shared(dev)); > uint64_t log_base = (uintptr_t)log->log; > int r; > > /* inform backend of log switching, this must be done before > releasing the current log, to ensure no logging is lost */ > r = dev->vhost_ops->vhost_set_log_base(dev, log_base, log); > > so when is a log resize legal? > > Dave Log base has nothing to do with log resize. It supplies the physical address of the ring for dirty logging purposes. > > Signed-off-by: Victor Kaplansky > > Suggested-by: Maxime Coquelin > > --- > > docs/interop/vhost-user.txt | 6 ++++++ > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/docs/interop/vhost-user.txt b/docs/interop/vhost-user.txt > > index 954771d0d8..7ab31e57ef 100644 > > --- a/docs/interop/vhost-user.txt > > +++ b/docs/interop/vhost-user.txt > > @@ -257,6 +257,12 @@ Where addr is the guest physical address. > > > > Use atomic operations, as the log may be concurrently manipulated. > > > > +Note that master is not expected to issue more than one VHOST_USER_SET_LOG_BASE > > +request before the rings are fully stopped by the master. Thus no modifications > > +to log_base address are allowed before the rings are restated and the client > > +can ignore all subsequent VHOST_USER_SET_LOG_BASE requests after the log_base > > +address has been established. > > + > > Note that when logging modifications to the used ring (when VHOST_VRING_F_LOG > > is set for this ring), log_guest_addr should be used to calculate the log > > offset: the write to first byte of the used ring is logged at this offset from > > -- > > 2.14.2 > > > -- > Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK