Re: [PATCH V2 7/8] vfio/pci: Support dynamic MSI-x

[Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>]

On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 16:40:50 -0600
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 14:53:34 -0700
> Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> > Recently introduced pci_msix_alloc_irq_at() and pci_msix_free_irq()
> > enables an individual MSI-X index to be allocated and freed after
> > MSI-X enabling.
> > 
> > Support dynamic MSI-X if supported by the device. Keep the association
> > between allocated interrupt and vfio interrupt context. Allocate new
> > context together with the new interrupt if no interrupt context exist
> > for an MSI-X interrupt. Similarly, release an interrupt with its
> > context.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
> > ---
> > Changes since RFC V1:
> > - Add pointer to interrupt context as function parameter to
> >   vfio_irq_ctx_free(). (Alex)
> > - Initialize new_ctx to false. (Dan Carpenter)
> > - Only support dynamic allocation if device supports it. (Alex)
> > 
> >  drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c | 93 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> >  1 file changed, 76 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c
> > index b3a258e58625..755b752ca17e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c
> > +++ b/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_intrs.c
> > @@ -55,6 +55,13 @@ struct vfio_pci_irq_ctx *vfio_irq_ctx_get(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> >  	return xa_load(&vdev->ctx, index);
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void vfio_irq_ctx_free(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> > +			      struct vfio_pci_irq_ctx *ctx, unsigned long index)
> > +{
> > +	xa_erase(&vdev->ctx, index);
> > +	kfree(ctx);
> > +}

Also, the function below should use this rather than open coding the
same now.  Thanks,

Alex

> > +
> >  static void vfio_irq_ctx_free_all(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev)
> >  {
> >  	struct vfio_pci_irq_ctx *ctx;
> > @@ -409,33 +416,62 @@ static int vfio_msi_set_vector_signal(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> >  {
> >  	struct pci_dev *pdev = vdev->pdev;
> >  	struct vfio_pci_irq_ctx *ctx;
> > +	struct msi_map msix_map = {};
> > +	bool allow_dyn_alloc = false;
> >  	struct eventfd_ctx *trigger;
> > +	bool new_ctx = false;
> >  	int irq, ret;
> >  	u16 cmd;
> >  
> > +	/* Only MSI-X allows dynamic allocation. */
> > +	if (msix && pci_msix_can_alloc_dyn(vdev->pdev))
> > +		allow_dyn_alloc = true;  
> 
> Should vfio-pci-core probe this and store it in a field on
> vfio_pci_core_device so that we can simply use something like
> vdev->has_dyn_msix throughout?
> 
> > +
> >  	ctx = vfio_irq_ctx_get(vdev, vector);
> > -	if (!ctx)
> > +	if (!ctx && !allow_dyn_alloc)
> >  		return -EINVAL;
> > +
> >  	irq = pci_irq_vector(pdev, vector);
> > +	/* Context and interrupt are always allocated together. */
> > +	WARN_ON((ctx && irq == -EINVAL) || (!ctx && irq != -EINVAL));
> >  
> > -	if (ctx->trigger) {
> > +	if (ctx && ctx->trigger) {
> >  		irq_bypass_unregister_producer(&ctx->producer);
> >  
> >  		cmd = vfio_pci_memory_lock_and_enable(vdev);
> >  		free_irq(irq, ctx->trigger);
> > +		if (allow_dyn_alloc) {  
> 
> It almost seems easier to define msix_map in each scope that it's used:
> 
> 			struct msi_map map = { .index = vector,
> 					       .virq = irq };
> 
> > +			msix_map.index = vector;
> > +			msix_map.virq = irq;
> > +			pci_msix_free_irq(pdev, msix_map);
> > +			irq = -EINVAL;
> > +		}
> >  		vfio_pci_memory_unlock_and_restore(vdev, cmd);
> >  		kfree(ctx->name);
> >  		eventfd_ctx_put(ctx->trigger);
> >  		ctx->trigger = NULL;
> > +		if (allow_dyn_alloc) {
> > +			vfio_irq_ctx_free(vdev, ctx, vector);
> > +			ctx = NULL;
> > +		}
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	if (fd < 0)
> >  		return 0;
> >  
> > +	if (!ctx) {
> > +		ctx = vfio_irq_ctx_alloc_single(vdev, vector);
> > +		if (!ctx)
> > +			return -ENOMEM;
> > +		new_ctx = true;
> > +	}
> > +
> >  	ctx->name = kasprintf(GFP_KERNEL_ACCOUNT, "vfio-msi%s[%d](%s)",
> >  			      msix ? "x" : "", vector, pci_name(pdev));
> > -	if (!ctx->name)
> > -		return -ENOMEM;
> > +	if (!ctx->name) {
> > +		ret = -ENOMEM;
> > +		goto out_free_ctx;
> > +	}
> >  
> >  	trigger = eventfd_ctx_fdget(fd);
> >  	if (IS_ERR(trigger)) {
> > @@ -443,25 +479,38 @@ static int vfio_msi_set_vector_signal(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> >  		goto out_free_name;
> >  	}
> >  
> > -	/*
> > -	 * The MSIx vector table resides in device memory which may be cleared
> > -	 * via backdoor resets. We don't allow direct access to the vector
> > -	 * table so even if a userspace driver attempts to save/restore around
> > -	 * such a reset it would be unsuccessful. To avoid this, restore the
> > -	 * cached value of the message prior to enabling.
> > -	 */
> >  	cmd = vfio_pci_memory_lock_and_enable(vdev);
> >  	if (msix) {
> > -		struct msi_msg msg;
> > -
> > -		get_cached_msi_msg(irq, &msg);
> > -		pci_write_msi_msg(irq, &msg);
> > +		if (irq == -EINVAL) {
> > +			msix_map = pci_msix_alloc_irq_at(pdev, vector, NULL);  
> 
> 			struct msi_map map = pci_msix_alloc_irq_at(pdev,
> 								vector, NULL);
> > +			if (msix_map.index < 0) {
> > +				vfio_pci_memory_unlock_and_restore(vdev, cmd);
> > +				ret = msix_map.index;
> > +				goto out_put_eventfd_ctx;
> > +			}
> > +			irq = msix_map.virq;
> > +		} else {
> > +			/*
> > +			 * The MSIx vector table resides in device memory which
> > +			 * may be cleared via backdoor resets. We don't allow
> > +			 * direct access to the vector table so even if a
> > +			 * userspace driver attempts to save/restore around
> > +			 * such a reset it would be unsuccessful. To avoid
> > +			 * this, restore the cached value of the message prior
> > +			 * to enabling.
> > +			 */  
> 
> You've only just copied this comment down to here, but I think it's a
> bit stale.  Maybe we should update it to something that helps explain
> this split better, maybe:
> 
> 			/*
> 			 * If the vector was previously allocated, refresh the
> 			 * on-device message data before enabling in case it had
> 			 * been cleared or corrupted since writing.
> 			 */
> 
> IIRC, that was the purpose of writing it back to the device and the
> blocking of direct access is no longer accurate anyway.
> 
> > +			struct msi_msg msg;
> > +
> > +			get_cached_msi_msg(irq, &msg);
> > +			pci_write_msi_msg(irq, &msg);
> > +		}
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	ret = request_irq(irq, vfio_msihandler, 0, ctx->name, trigger);
> > -	vfio_pci_memory_unlock_and_restore(vdev, cmd);
> >  	if (ret)
> > -		goto out_put_eventfd_ctx;
> > +		goto out_free_irq_locked;
> > +
> > +	vfio_pci_memory_unlock_and_restore(vdev, cmd);
> >  
> >  	ctx->producer.token = trigger;
> >  	ctx->producer.irq = irq;
> > @@ -477,11 +526,21 @@ static int vfio_msi_set_vector_signal(struct vfio_pci_core_device *vdev,
> >  
> >  	return 0;
> >  
> > +out_free_irq_locked:
> > +	if (allow_dyn_alloc && new_ctx) {  
> 
> 		struct msi_map map = { .index = vector,
> 				       .virq = irq };
> 
> > +		msix_map.index = vector;
> > +		msix_map.virq = irq;
> > +		pci_msix_free_irq(pdev, msix_map);
> > +	}
> > +	vfio_pci_memory_unlock_and_restore(vdev, cmd);
> >  out_put_eventfd_ctx:
> >  	eventfd_ctx_put(trigger);
> >  out_free_name:
> >  	kfree(ctx->name);
> >  	ctx->name = NULL;
> > +out_free_ctx:
> > +	if (allow_dyn_alloc && new_ctx)
> > +		vfio_irq_ctx_free(vdev, ctx, vector);
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >    
> 
> Do we really need the new_ctx test in the above cases?  Thanks,
> 
> Alex