From: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Feng Jin <joe.jin@oracle.com>,
Yuval Shaia <yuval.shaia@oracle.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Chien Yen <chien.yen@oracle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: reuse the same pirq allocated when driver load first time
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 15:19:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51C7F2FE.3090803@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1306201507010.4548@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>> On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>> On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>>>> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
>>>>
>>>> I think the culprit is "physdev_unmap_pirq":
>>>>
>>>> if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
>>>> {
>>>> spin_lock(&d->event_lock);
>>>> gdprintk(XENLOG_WARNING,"d%d, pirq: %d is %x %s, irq: %d\n",
>>>> d->domain_id, pirq, domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq),
>>>> domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) == IRQ_UNBOUND ? "unbound" :
>>>> "",
>>>> domain_pirq_to_irq(d, pirq));
>>>> if
>>>> ( domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) != IRQ_UNBOUND )
>>>> ret = unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq(d, pirq);
>>>> spin_unlock(&d->event_lock);
>>>> if ( domid == DOMID_SELF || ret )
>>>> goto free_domain;
>>>>
>>>> It always tells me unbound:
>>>>
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 54 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 53 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 52 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 51 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 50 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (a bit older debug code, so the 'unbound' does not show up here).
>>>>
>>>> Which means that the call to unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq does not happen.
>>>> The checks in unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq also look to be depend
>>>> on the code being IRQ_UNBOUND.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, all of that code looks to only clear things when
>>>> they are !IRQ_UNBOUND.
>>>>
>>>> But the other logic (IRQ_UNBOUND) looks to be missing a removal
>>>> in the radix tree:
>>>>
>>>> if ( emuirq != IRQ_PT )
>>>> radix_tree_delete(&d->arch.hvm_domain.emuirq_pirq, emuirq);
>>>> And
>>>> I think that is what is causing the leak - the radix tree
>>>> needs to be pruned? Or perhaps the allocate_pirq should check
>>>> the radix tree for IRQ_UNBOUND ones and re-use them?
>>>>
>>>> I think that you are looking in the wrong place.
>>>> The issue is that QEMU doesn't call pt_msi_disable in
>>>> pt_msgctrl_reg_write if (!val & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE).
>>>>
>>>> The code above is correct as is because it is trying to handle emulated
>>>> IRQs and MSIs, not real passthrough MSIs. They latter are not added to
>>>> that radix tree, see physdev_hvm_map_pirq and physdev_map_pirq.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This patch fixes the issue, I have only tested MSI (MSI-X completely
>>>> untested).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/hw/pass-through.c b/hw/pass-through.c
>>>> index 304c438..079e465 100644
>>>> --- a/hw/pass-through.c
>>>> +++ b/hw/pass-through.c
>>>> @@ -3866,7 +3866,11 @@ static int pt_msgctrl_reg_write(struct pt_dev
>>>> *ptdev,
>>>> ptdev->msi->flags |= PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE;
>>>> }
>>>> else
>>>> - ptdev->msi->flags &= ~PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE;
>>>> + {
>>>> + if (ptdev->msi->flags & PT_MSI_MAPPED) {
>>>> + pt_msi_disable(ptdev);
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>> /* pass through MSI_ENABLE bit when no MSI-INTx translation */
>>>> if (!ptdev->msi_trans_en) {
>>>> @@ -4013,6 +4017,8 @@ static int pt_msixctrl_reg_write(struct pt_dev
>>>> *ptdev,
>>>> pt_disable_msi_translate(ptdev);
>>>> }
>>>> pt_msix_update(ptdev);
>>>> + } else if (!(*value & PCI_MSIX_ENABLE) && ptdev->msix->enabled) {
>>>> + pt_msix_delete(ptdev);
>>>>
>>>> Hi Stefano,
>>>> I made a test with this patch, os reboot when driver reload. If use
>>>> pt_msix_disable
>>>> instead of pt_msix_delete, driver could be reloaded.
>>>> But I still see some error in qemu.log and xen console. Seems four IRQs
>>>> are not freed
>>>> when unmap.
>>>> --------------first load---------------------------
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 103
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 0 with pirq 67 gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 102
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 1 with pirq 66 gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 101
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 2 with pirq 65 gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 100
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 3 with pirq 64 gvec 0
>>>> ------------- first unload---------------------------
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 67, gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 67
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 66, gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 66
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 65, gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 65
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 64, gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 64
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>>> Can you add some printks in Xen (the hypercall name is
>>> PHYSDEVOP_unmap_pirq) to figure out exactly why they are failing?
>> Did some test, domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, unmap->pirq) = IRQ_UNBOUND in
>> physdev_unmap_pirq.
> That means that Linux didn't call irq_enable on the MSI-X in question:
>
> irq_enable -> __startup_pirq -> EVTCHNOP_bind_pirq
>
> EVTCHNOP_bind_pirq is implemented by evtchn_bind_pirq in Xen and calls
> map_domain_emuirq_pirq, so domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, unmap->pirq) should
> be IRQ_PT.
>
> I don't know if that's a normal condition, but in any case it should
> not create any problems to physdev_unmap_pirq, in fact the folloing
> check:
>
> if ( domid == DOMID_SELF || ret )
> goto free_domain;
>
> should fail so Xen should continue and execute unmap_domain_pirq. That's
> what we want.
From linux side, request_irq-> request_threaded_irq-> __setup_irq->
irq_startup-> startup_pirq-> EVTCHNOP_bind_pirq
If irq_enable isn't called, how does the driver receive interrupt, I did
see four interrupts in /proc/interrupt and driver works ok.
Could you have a look if there is something wrong in xen side of
clearing the mapping?
zduan
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Zhenzhong Duan <zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com>
To: Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>,
"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
Feng Jin <joe.jin@oracle.com>,
Yuval Shaia <yuval.shaia@oracle.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Chien Yen <chien.yen@oracle.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: reuse the same pirq allocated when driver load first time
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 15:19:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51C7F2FE.3090803@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1306201507010.4548@kaball.uk.xensource.com>
On 2013-06-20 22:21, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>> On 2013-06-05 20:50, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>> On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Zhenzhong Duan wrote:
>>>> Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 21 May 2013, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Looking at the hypervisor code I couldn't see anything obviously wrong.
>>>>
>>>> I think the culprit is "physdev_unmap_pirq":
>>>>
>>>> if ( is_hvm_domain(d) )
>>>> {
>>>> spin_lock(&d->event_lock);
>>>> gdprintk(XENLOG_WARNING,"d%d, pirq: %d is %x %s, irq: %d\n",
>>>> d->domain_id, pirq, domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq),
>>>> domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) == IRQ_UNBOUND ? "unbound" :
>>>> "",
>>>> domain_pirq_to_irq(d, pirq));
>>>> if
>>>> ( domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, pirq) != IRQ_UNBOUND )
>>>> ret = unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq(d, pirq);
>>>> spin_unlock(&d->event_lock);
>>>> if ( domid == DOMID_SELF || ret )
>>>> goto free_domain;
>>>>
>>>> It always tells me unbound:
>>>>
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 54 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 53 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 52 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 51 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (XEN) physdev.c:237:d14 14, pirq: 50 is ffffffff
>>>> (XEN) irq.c:1873:d14 14, nr_pirqs: 56
>>>> (a bit older debug code, so the 'unbound' does not show up here).
>>>>
>>>> Which means that the call to unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq does not happen.
>>>> The checks in unmap_domain_pirq_emuirq also look to be depend
>>>> on the code being IRQ_UNBOUND.
>>>>
>>>> In other words, all of that code looks to only clear things when
>>>> they are !IRQ_UNBOUND.
>>>>
>>>> But the other logic (IRQ_UNBOUND) looks to be missing a removal
>>>> in the radix tree:
>>>>
>>>> if ( emuirq != IRQ_PT )
>>>> radix_tree_delete(&d->arch.hvm_domain.emuirq_pirq, emuirq);
>>>> And
>>>> I think that is what is causing the leak - the radix tree
>>>> needs to be pruned? Or perhaps the allocate_pirq should check
>>>> the radix tree for IRQ_UNBOUND ones and re-use them?
>>>>
>>>> I think that you are looking in the wrong place.
>>>> The issue is that QEMU doesn't call pt_msi_disable in
>>>> pt_msgctrl_reg_write if (!val & PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE).
>>>>
>>>> The code above is correct as is because it is trying to handle emulated
>>>> IRQs and MSIs, not real passthrough MSIs. They latter are not added to
>>>> that radix tree, see physdev_hvm_map_pirq and physdev_map_pirq.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This patch fixes the issue, I have only tested MSI (MSI-X completely
>>>> untested).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/hw/pass-through.c b/hw/pass-through.c
>>>> index 304c438..079e465 100644
>>>> --- a/hw/pass-through.c
>>>> +++ b/hw/pass-through.c
>>>> @@ -3866,7 +3866,11 @@ static int pt_msgctrl_reg_write(struct pt_dev
>>>> *ptdev,
>>>> ptdev->msi->flags |= PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE;
>>>> }
>>>> else
>>>> - ptdev->msi->flags &= ~PCI_MSI_FLAGS_ENABLE;
>>>> + {
>>>> + if (ptdev->msi->flags & PT_MSI_MAPPED) {
>>>> + pt_msi_disable(ptdev);
>>>> + }
>>>> + }
>>>> /* pass through MSI_ENABLE bit when no MSI-INTx translation */
>>>> if (!ptdev->msi_trans_en) {
>>>> @@ -4013,6 +4017,8 @@ static int pt_msixctrl_reg_write(struct pt_dev
>>>> *ptdev,
>>>> pt_disable_msi_translate(ptdev);
>>>> }
>>>> pt_msix_update(ptdev);
>>>> + } else if (!(*value & PCI_MSIX_ENABLE) && ptdev->msix->enabled) {
>>>> + pt_msix_delete(ptdev);
>>>>
>>>> Hi Stefano,
>>>> I made a test with this patch, os reboot when driver reload. If use
>>>> pt_msix_disable
>>>> instead of pt_msix_delete, driver could be reloaded.
>>>> But I still see some error in qemu.log and xen console. Seems four IRQs
>>>> are not freed
>>>> when unmap.
>>>> --------------first load---------------------------
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 103
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 0 with pirq 67 gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 102
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 1 with pirq 66 gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 101
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 2 with pirq 65 gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: pt_msix_update_one requested pirq = 100
>>>> pt_msix_update_one: Update msix entry 3 with pirq 64 gvec 0
>>>> ------------- first unload---------------------------
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 67, gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 67
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 66, gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 66
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 65, gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 65
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unbind msix with pirq 64, gvec 0
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Unmap msix with pirq 64
>>>> pt_msix_disable: Error: Unmapping of MSI-X failed. [00:04.0]
>>> Can you add some printks in Xen (the hypercall name is
>>> PHYSDEVOP_unmap_pirq) to figure out exactly why they are failing?
>> Did some test, domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, unmap->pirq) = IRQ_UNBOUND in
>> physdev_unmap_pirq.
> That means that Linux didn't call irq_enable on the MSI-X in question:
>
> irq_enable -> __startup_pirq -> EVTCHNOP_bind_pirq
>
> EVTCHNOP_bind_pirq is implemented by evtchn_bind_pirq in Xen and calls
> map_domain_emuirq_pirq, so domain_pirq_to_emuirq(d, unmap->pirq) should
> be IRQ_PT.
>
> I don't know if that's a normal condition, but in any case it should
> not create any problems to physdev_unmap_pirq, in fact the folloing
> check:
>
> if ( domid == DOMID_SELF || ret )
> goto free_domain;
>
> should fail so Xen should continue and execute unmap_domain_pirq. That's
> what we want.
From linux side, request_irq-> request_threaded_irq-> __setup_irq->
irq_startup-> startup_pirq-> EVTCHNOP_bind_pirq
If irq_enable isn't called, how does the driver receive interrupt, I did
see four interrupts in /proc/interrupt and driver works ok.
Could you have a look if there is something wrong in xen side of
clearing the mapping?
zduan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-24 7:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-08 8:18 [PATCH] xen: reuse the same pirq allocated when driver load first time Zhenzhong Duan
2013-05-10 18:53 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-13 7:44 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-05-13 11:06 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-05-13 14:07 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-13 14:50 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-05-13 16:17 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-13 17:24 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-05-13 18:20 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-14 13:49 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-05-14 14:20 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-15 9:41 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-05-15 14:18 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-05-17 2:22 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-05-20 10:24 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-05-20 15:24 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-20 17:57 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-20 20:38 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-21 10:07 ` [Xen-devel] " David Vrabel
2013-05-21 13:40 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-21 16:51 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-05-21 20:42 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-21 21:50 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-05-21 22:41 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-22 9:37 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-22 15:14 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-22 15:25 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-22 16:41 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-05-23 6:31 ` Jan Beulich
2013-05-29 17:50 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-05-30 17:48 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-06-05 5:27 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-06-05 12:50 ` [Xen-devel] " Stefano Stabellini
2013-06-20 2:57 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-06-20 14:21 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-06-24 7:19 ` Zhenzhong Duan [this message]
2013-06-24 7:19 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-06-24 17:18 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-06-25 5:33 ` DuanZhenzhong
2013-06-25 5:33 ` DuanZhenzhong
2013-06-25 7:21 ` [PATCH 4.1] x86: fix emuirq regression from XSA-21 fix (was: Re: [PATCH] xen: reuse the same pirq allocated when driver load first time) Jan Beulich
2013-06-25 7:44 ` [PATCH 4.1] x86: fix emuirq regression from XSA-21 fix DuanZhenzhong
2013-06-25 8:36 ` Jan Beulich
2013-06-25 8:43 ` DuanZhenzhong
2013-06-25 10:56 ` [PATCH 4.1] x86: fix emuirq regression from XSA-21 fix (was: Re: [PATCH] xen: reuse the same pirq allocated when driver load first time) Stefano Stabellini
2013-06-25 11:03 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-06-27 8:34 ` Jan Beulich
2013-06-27 10:46 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-06-25 17:51 ` [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen: reuse the same pirq allocated when driver load first time Stefano Stabellini
2013-06-26 4:00 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-06-26 4:00 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-06-26 18:08 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-06-27 4:01 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-06-27 4:01 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-06-27 11:52 ` Stefano Stabellini
2013-06-28 2:33 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-06-28 2:33 ` Zhenzhong Duan
2013-06-28 11:12 ` Stefano Stabellini
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=51C7F2FE.3090803@oracle.com \
--to=zhenzhong.duan@oracle.com \
--cc=chien.yen@oracle.com \
--cc=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=joe.jin@oracle.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
--cc=yuval.shaia@oracle.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.