All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] KVM: Allow host IRQ sharing for passed-through PCI 2.3 devices
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2010 18:56:14 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CD050BE.5010703@siemens.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101102174149.GC1304@redhat.com>

Am 02.11.2010 18:41, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 04:49:20PM +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> PCI 2.3 allows to generically disable IRQ sources at device level. This
>> enables us to share IRQs of such devices between on the host side when
>> passing them to a guest.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
>> ---
>>  include/linux/kvm_host.h |    1 +
>>  virt/kvm/assigned-dev.c  |  194 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>  2 files changed, 180 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> index 46120da..fdc2bd9 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -466,6 +466,7 @@ struct kvm_assigned_dev_kernel {
>>  	unsigned int entries_nr;
>>  	int host_irq;
>>  	bool host_irq_disabled;
>> +	bool pci_2_3;
>>  	struct msix_entry *host_msix_entries;
>>  	int guest_irq;
>>  	struct msix_entry *guest_msix_entries;
>> diff --git a/virt/kvm/assigned-dev.c b/virt/kvm/assigned-dev.c
>> index ca402ed..91fe9c8 100644
>> --- a/virt/kvm/assigned-dev.c
>> +++ b/virt/kvm/assigned-dev.c
>> @@ -55,17 +55,145 @@ static int find_index_from_host_irq(struct kvm_assigned_dev_kernel
>>  	return index;
>>  }
>>  
>> +/*
>> + * Verify that the device supports Interrupt Disable bit in command register,
>> + * per PCI 2.3, by flipping this bit and reading it back: this bit was readonly
>> + * in PCI 2.2.
>> + */
>> +static bool pci_2_3_supported(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>> +{
>> +	bool supported = false;
>> +	u16 orig, new;
>> +
>> +	pci_block_user_cfg_access(pdev);
>> +	pci_read_config_word(pdev, PCI_COMMAND, &orig);
>> +	pci_write_config_word(pdev, PCI_COMMAND,
>> +			      orig ^ PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE);
>> +	pci_read_config_word(pdev, PCI_COMMAND, &new);
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * There's no way to protect against
>> +	 * hardware bugs or detect them reliably, but as long as we know
>> +	 * what the value should be, let's go ahead and check it.
>> +	 */
>> +	if ((new ^ orig) & ~PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE) {
>> +		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Command changed from 0x%x to 0x%x: "
>> +			"driver or HW bug?\n", orig, new);
>> +		goto out;
>> +	}
>> +	if (!((new ^ orig) & PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE)) {
>> +		dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "Device does not support "
>> +			 "disabling interrupts: unable to bind.\n");
>> +		goto out;
>> +	}
>> +	supported = true;
>> +
>> +	/* Now restore the original value. */
>> +	pci_write_config_word(pdev, PCI_COMMAND, orig);
>> +
>> +out:
>> +	pci_unblock_user_cfg_access(pdev);
>> +	return supported;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static unsigned int
>> +pci_2_3_set_irq_mask(struct pci_dev *dev, bool mask, bool check_status)
>> +{
>> +	u32 cmd_status_dword;
>> +	u16 origcmd, newcmd;
>> +	unsigned int status;
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * We do a single dword read to retrieve both command and status.
>> +	 * Document assumptions that make this possible.
>> +	 */
>> +	BUILD_BUG_ON(PCI_COMMAND % 4);
>> +	BUILD_BUG_ON(PCI_COMMAND + 2 != PCI_STATUS);
>> +
>> +	pci_block_user_cfg_access(dev);
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Read both command and status registers in a single 32-bit operation.
>> +	 * Note: we could cache the value for command and move the status read
>> +	 * out of the lock if there was a way to get notified of user changes
>> +	 * to command register through sysfs. Should be good for shared irqs.
>> +	 */
>> +	pci_read_config_dword(dev, PCI_COMMAND, &cmd_status_dword);
>> +	origcmd = cmd_status_dword;
>> +	status = cmd_status_dword >> 16;
>> +
>> +	if (check_status) {
>> +		bool irq_pending = status & PCI_STATUS_INTERRUPT;
>> +
>> +		/*
>> +		 * Check interrupt status register to see whether our device
>> +		 * triggered the interrupt (when masking) or the next IRQ is
>> +		 * already pending (when unmasking).
>> +		 */
>> +		if (!(mask == irq_pending))
> 
> Same as mask != irq_pending?

Yes. Relict of various refactorings.

> 
>> +			goto done;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	newcmd = origcmd & ~PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE;
>> +	if (mask)
>> +		newcmd |= PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE;
>> +	if (newcmd != origcmd)
>> +		pci_write_config_word(dev, PCI_COMMAND, newcmd);
>> +
>> +done:
>> +	pci_unblock_user_cfg_access(dev);
>> +	return status;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void pci_2_3_irq_mask(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> +{
>> +	pci_2_3_set_irq_mask(dev, true, false);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static unsigned int pci_2_3_irq_check_and_mask(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> +{
>> +	return pci_2_3_set_irq_mask(dev, true, true);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void pci_2_3_irq_unmask(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> +{
>> +	pci_2_3_set_irq_mask(dev, false, false);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static unsigned int pci_2_3_irq_check_and_unmask(struct pci_dev *dev)
>> +{
>> +	return pci_2_3_set_irq_mask(dev, false, true);
>> +}
>> +
> 
> IMO this is not a terribly good interface: all users check the pending bit
> (PCI_STATUS_INTERRUPT) which is what the function pci_2_3_set_irq_mask
> did anyway.  I'd suggest returning irqreturn_t or bool and not unsigned
> int.

Agreed. Originally, I thought there are more bits in the status word the
caller may make use of. But there are in fact none.

> 
> 
>> +static irqreturn_t kvm_assigned_dev_intr(int irq, void *dev_id)
>> +{
>> +	struct kvm_assigned_dev_kernel *assigned_dev = dev_id;
>> +	int ret = IRQ_WAKE_THREAD;
>> +
>> +	spin_lock(&assigned_dev->intx_lock);
>> +	if (assigned_dev->host_irq_disabled ||
>> +	    !(pci_2_3_irq_check_and_mask(assigned_dev->dev) &
>> +			PCI_STATUS_INTERRUPT))
>> +		ret = IRQ_NONE;
>> +	else
>> +		assigned_dev->host_irq_disabled = true;
> 
> This is a bug I think.  For pci 2.3 we should never track interrupt
> state in kvm IMO.  For example, if userspace unmasks an interrupt
> through a config write, we will get an interrupt while host_irq_disabled
> is set. If we then fail to mask it, kaboom.

Good point. There is no way around evaluating the status word as long as
user space can fiddle with INTX_DISABLE.

> 
>> +	spin_unlock(&assigned_dev->intx_lock);
>> +
>> +	return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>>  static irqreturn_t kvm_assigned_dev_thread(int irq, void *dev_id)
>>  {
>>  	struct kvm_assigned_dev_kernel *assigned_dev = dev_id;
>>  	u32 vector;
>>  	int index;
>>  
>> -	if (assigned_dev->irq_requested_type & KVM_DEV_IRQ_HOST_INTX) {
>> -		spin_lock(&assigned_dev->intx_lock);
>> +	if (assigned_dev->irq_requested_type & KVM_DEV_IRQ_HOST_INTX &&
>> +	    !assigned_dev->pci_2_3) {
>> +		spin_lock_irq(&assigned_dev->intx_lock);
>>  		disable_irq_nosync(irq);
>>  		assigned_dev->host_irq_disabled = true;
>> -		spin_unlock(&assigned_dev->intx_lock);
>> +		spin_unlock_irq(&assigned_dev->intx_lock);
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	if (assigned_dev->irq_requested_type & KVM_DEV_IRQ_HOST_MSIX) {
>> @@ -87,6 +215,7 @@ static irqreturn_t kvm_assigned_dev_thread(int irq, void *dev_id)
>>  static void kvm_assigned_dev_ack_irq(struct kvm_irq_ack_notifier *kian)
>>  {
>>  	struct kvm_assigned_dev_kernel *dev;
>> +	bool reassert = false;
>>  
>>  	if (kian->gsi == -1)
>>  		return;
>> @@ -99,12 +228,23 @@ static void kvm_assigned_dev_ack_irq(struct kvm_irq_ack_notifier *kian)
>>  	/* The guest irq may be shared so this ack may be
>>  	 * from another device.
>>  	 */
>> -	spin_lock(&dev->intx_lock);
>> +	spin_lock_irq(&dev->intx_lock);
>>  	if (dev->host_irq_disabled) {
>> -		enable_irq(dev->host_irq);
>> +		if (dev->pci_2_3) {
>> +			if (pci_2_3_irq_check_and_unmask(dev->dev) &
>> +			    PCI_STATUS_INTERRUPT) {
>> +				reassert = true;
>> +				goto out;
>> +			}
>> +		} else
>> +			enable_irq(dev->host_irq);
> 
> Or
> 
> 		if (!dev->pci_2_3)
> 			enable_irq(dev->host_irq);
> 		else if (pci_2_3_irq_check_and_unmask(dev->dev) & PCI_STATUS_INTERRUPT) {
> 			reassert = true;
> 			goto out;
> 		}
> 
> to reduce nesting.

Yeah.

> 
>>  		dev->host_irq_disabled = false;
>>  	}
>> -	spin_unlock(&dev->intx_lock);
>> +out:
>> +	spin_unlock_irq(&dev->intx_lock);
>> +
>> +	if (reassert)
>> +		kvm_set_irq(dev->kvm, dev->irq_source_id, dev->guest_irq, 1);
> 
> Hmm, I think this still has more overhead than it needs to have.
> Instead of setting level to 0 and then back to 1, can't we just
> avoid set to 1 in the first place? This would need a different
> interface than pci_2_3_irq_check_and_unmask to avoid a race
> where interrupt is received while we are acking another one:
> 
> 	block userspace access
> 	check pending bit
> 	if (!pending)
> 		set irq (0)
> 	clear pending
> 	block userspace access
> 
> Would be worth it for high volume devices.

The problem is that we can't reorder guest IRQ line clearing and host
IRQ line enabling without taking a lock across host IRQ disable + guest
IRQ raise - and that is now distributed across hard and threaded IRQ
handlers and we don't want to hold and IRQ-safe lock during kvm_set_irq.

> 
>>  }
>>  
>>  static void deassign_guest_irq(struct kvm *kvm,
>> @@ -151,7 +291,11 @@ static void deassign_host_irq(struct kvm *kvm,
>>  		pci_disable_msix(assigned_dev->dev);
>>  	} else {
>>  		/* Deal with MSI and INTx */
>> -		disable_irq(assigned_dev->host_irq);
>> +		if (assigned_dev->pci_2_3) {
>> +			pci_2_3_irq_mask(assigned_dev->dev);
>> +			synchronize_irq(assigned_dev->host_irq);
>> +		} else
>> +			disable_irq(assigned_dev->host_irq);
>>  
>>  		free_irq(assigned_dev->host_irq, (void *)assigned_dev);
>>  
>> @@ -199,6 +343,13 @@ static void kvm_free_assigned_device(struct kvm *kvm,
>>  
>>  	pci_reset_function(assigned_dev->dev);
>>  
>> +	/*
>> +	 * Unmask the IRQ at PCI level once the reset is done - the next user
>> +	 * may not expect the IRQ being masked.
>> +	 */
>> +	if (assigned_dev->pci_2_3)
>> +		pci_2_3_irq_unmask(assigned_dev->dev);
>> +
> 
> Doesn't pci_reset_function clear mask bit? It seems to ...

I was left with non-functional devices for the host here if I was not
doing this. Need to recheck, but I think it was required.

> 
>>  	pci_release_regions(assigned_dev->dev);
>>  	pci_disable_device(assigned_dev->dev);
>>  	pci_dev_put(assigned_dev->dev);
>> @@ -224,15 +375,29 @@ void kvm_free_all_assigned_devices(struct kvm *kvm)
>>  static int assigned_device_enable_host_intx(struct kvm *kvm,
>>  					    struct kvm_assigned_dev_kernel *dev)
>>  {
>> +	irq_handler_t irq_handler = NULL;
>> +	unsigned long flags = 0;
>> +
>>  	dev->host_irq = dev->dev->irq;
>> -	/* Even though this is PCI, we don't want to use shared
>> -	 * interrupts. Sharing host devices with guest-assigned devices
>> -	 * on the same interrupt line is not a happy situation: there
>> -	 * are going to be long delays in accepting, acking, etc.
>> +
>> +	/*
>> +	 * We can only share the IRQ line with other host devices if we are
>> +	 * able to disable the IRQ source at device-level - independently of
>> +	 * the guest driver. Otherwise host devices may suffer from unbounded
>> +	 * IRQ latencies when the guest keeps the line asserted.
>>  	 */
>> -	if (request_threaded_irq(dev->host_irq, NULL, kvm_assigned_dev_thread,
>> -				 0, dev->irq_name, (void *)dev))
>> +	dev->pci_2_3 = pci_2_3_supported(dev->dev);
>> +	if (dev->pci_2_3) {
>> +		irq_handler = kvm_assigned_dev_intr;
>> +		flags = IRQF_SHARED;
>> +	}
> 
> I would prefer and else clause here instead of initializing
> variables at the top and overwriting here. Makes it easier
> to see which value is valid when.

OK.

Thanks,
Jan

-- 
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux

  reply	other threads:[~2010-11-02 17:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-11-02 15:49 [PATCH v2 0/4] KVM: Improve IRQ assignment for device passthrough Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 15:49 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] KVM: Clear assigned guest IRQ on release Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 15:49 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] KVM: Switch assigned device IRQ forwarding to threaded handler Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 17:44   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 17:58     ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 15:49 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] KVM: Refactor IRQ names of assigned devices Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 15:49 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] KVM: Allow host IRQ sharing for passed-through PCI 2.3 devices Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 17:41   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 17:56     ` Jan Kiszka [this message]
2010-11-02 18:24       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 18:40         ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 18:48           ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 18:51             ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 18:54               ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 19:30                 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 19:53                   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 19:58                     ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 20:05                       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 18:52           ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 19:11             ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 19:14               ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 19:56                 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-02 19:41           ` Alex Williamson
2010-11-02 17:11 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] KVM: Improve IRQ assignment for device passthrough Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-02 17:56   ` Jan Kiszka
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-12-12 11:22 [PATCH v2 0/4] KVM & genirq: Enable adaptive IRQ sharing for passed-through devices Jan Kiszka
2010-12-12 11:22 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] KVM: Allow host IRQ sharing for passed-through PCI 2.3 devices Jan Kiszka
2010-12-13 10:19   ` Avi Kivity

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=4CD050BE.5010703@siemens.com \
    --to=jan.kiszka@siemens.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=avi@redhat.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=mtosatti@redhat.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.