From: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
To: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Cc: Jason Herne <jjherne@linux.ibm.com>,
Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org,
Jared Rossi <jrossi@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] vfio-ccw: Return IOINST_CC_NOT_OPERATIONAL for EIO
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:24:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200325032428.11dd27a2.pasic@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200324180430.3597ca94.cohuck@redhat.com>
On Tue, 24 Mar 2020 18:04:30 +0100
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 22:45:03 +0100
> Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>
> >
> > EIO is returned by vfio-ccw mediated device when the backing
> > host subchannel is not operational anymore. So return cc=3
> > back to the guest, rather than returning a unit check.
> > This way the guest can take appropriate action such as
> > issue an 'stsch'.
I believe this is not the only situation when vfio-ccw returns
EIO, or?
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >
> > Notes:
> > v1->v2: [EF]
> > - Add s-o-b
> > - [Seems the discussion on v1 centered on the return code
> > set in the kernel, rather than anything that needs to
> > change here, unless I've missed something.]
Does this need to change here? If the kernel is supposed to return ENODEV
then this does not need to change.
>
> I've stared at this and at the kernel code for some time again; and I'm
> not sure if "return -EIO == not operational" is even true. That said,
> I'm not sure a unit check is the right response, either. The only thing
> I'm sure about is that the kernel code needs some review of return
> codes and some documentation...
I could not agree more, this is semantically uapi and needs to be
properly documented.
With regards to "linux error codes: vs "ionist cc's" an where
the mapping is different example:
"""
/**
* cio_cancel_halt_clear - Cancel running I/O by performing cancel, halt
* and clear ordinally if subchannel is valid.
* @sch: subchannel on which to perform the cancel_halt_clear operation
* @iretry: the number of the times remained to retry the next operation
*
* This should be called repeatedly since halt/clear are asynchronous
* operations. We do one try with cio_cancel, three tries with cio_halt,
* 255 tries with cio_clear. The caller should initialize @iretry with
* the value 255 for its first call to this, and keep using the same
* @iretry in the subsequent calls until it gets a non -EBUSY return.
*
* Returns 0 if device now idle, -ENODEV for device not operational,
* -EBUSY if an interrupt is expected (either from halt/clear or from a
* status pending), and -EIO if out of retries.
*/
int cio_cancel_halt_clear(struct subchannel *sch, int *iretry)
"""
Here -ENODEV is not operational.
Regards,
Halil
>
> >
> > hw/vfio/ccw.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/vfio/ccw.c b/hw/vfio/ccw.c
> > index 50cc2ec75c..19144ecfc7 100644
> > --- a/hw/vfio/ccw.c
> > +++ b/hw/vfio/ccw.c
> > @@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ again:
> > return IOINST_CC_BUSY;
> > case -ENODEV:
> > case -EACCES:
> > + case -EIO:
> > return IOINST_CC_NOT_OPERATIONAL;
> > case -EFAULT:
> > default:
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-25 2:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-06 21:45 [RFC PATCH v2 0/7] s390x/vfio_ccw: Channel Path Handling [QEMU] Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] vfio-ccw: Return IOINST_CC_NOT_OPERATIONAL for EIO Eric Farman
2020-03-24 17:04 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-03-25 2:24 ` Halil Pasic [this message]
2020-04-01 8:52 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-04-06 18:21 ` Eric Farman
2020-04-07 6:28 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-04-07 10:18 ` Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/7] linux-headers: update Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/7] vfio-ccw: Refactor cleanup of regions Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/7] vfio-ccw: Add support for the schib region Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/7] vfio-ccw: Add support for the crw region Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/7] vfio-ccw: Refactor ccw irq handler Eric Farman
2020-03-24 17:32 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 7/7] vfio-ccw: Add support for the CRW irq Eric Farman
2020-04-06 16:22 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-04-06 21:37 ` Eric Farman
2020-04-07 6:35 ` Cornelia Huck
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=20200325032428.11dd27a2.pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--to=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jjherne@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jrossi@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
/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.