All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Chen, Tiejun" <tiejun.chen@intel.com>
To: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com>,
	Stefano Stabellini <stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com>,
	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
	Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>,
	"xen-devel@lists.xen.org" <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
Subject: Re: [v4][PATCH 11/19] tools: introduce some new parameters to set rdm policy
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2015 19:16:41 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5593CC19.9020200@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5593C7AC.8030901@eu.citrix.com>

On 2015/7/1 18:57, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 07/01/2015 11:26 AM, Chen, Tiejun wrote:
>>>>> 1. By default, the domain policy is RELAXED (See above,
>>>>> libxl__rdm_setdefault()).
>>>>>
>>>>> 2. By default, the policy for individual devices is STRICT (see
>>>>> libxl_pci.c:libxl__device_pci_setdefault())
>>>>>
>>>>> 3. If the domain policy is set to STRICT, this overrides per-device
>>>>> policy
>>>>>
>>>>> 4. If the domain policy is set to RELAXED, I don't see that having an
>>>>> effect on individual devices
>>>>
>>>> This is our rule, and this is why I think you need to take a look at
>>>> patch #00, our design and all patch head descriptions,
>>>>
>>>> "Default per-device RDM policy is 'strict', while default global RDM
>>>> policy is 'relaxed'. When both policies are specified on a given region,
>>>> 'strict' is always preferred."
>>>
>>> It looks like you didn't finish reading my message.  I suggest you do so:
>>
>> Okay.
>>
>>>
>>>>> If I'm correct, then #3 means it's not possible to have devices for a
>>>>> domain *default* to strict, but to be relaxed in individual instances.
>>>>> If you had five devices you wanted strict, and only one device you
>>>>> wanted to be relaxed (because you knew it didn't matter), you'd have
>>>>> to set reserved=strict for all the other devices, rather than just
>>>>> being able to set the domain setting to strict and set reserve=relaxed
>>>>> for the one.
>>>>>
>>>>> I think that both violates the principle of least surprise, and is
>>>>> less useful.
>>>
>>
>> So what's you idea to follow our requirement?
>
> So consider the following config snippet:
>
> ---
> rdm="reserve=relaxed"
>
> pci=['01:00.1,msitranslate=1']
> ----
>
> What should the policy for that device be?
>
> According to your policy document, it seems to me like it should be
> "relaxed", since the domain default* is set to "relaxed" and nothing

Why? "strict" should be in this case.

> has been specified for the individual device.  That's what "default"

Shouldn't nothing mean we should take a default value?

+            /* We'd like to force reserve rdm specific to a device by 
default.*/
+            pcidev->rdm_reserve = LIBXL_RDM_RESERVE_FLAG_STRICT;

> means.  But as far as I can tell from reading the code, the effective
> policy for this one will actually be "strict".  That is not what people

Right.

> will expect.

Why are you saying this is not our expectation? Just let me pick up that 
description *again*,

"Default per-device RDM policy is 'strict', while default global RDM 
policy is 'relaxed'. When both policies are specified on a given region, 
'strict' is always preferred."

>
> (* I say "domain default" rather than "global default" because the
> default is defined only on a per-domain basis, not across all domains.
> To me a "global default" would be one more level up -- something set in
> xl.conf which affects all domains unless it's set in the config file.)
>
> Furthermore, consider the following config snippet:
>
> ---
> rdm="reserve=strict"
>
> pci=['01:00.1,msitranslate=1,rdm_reserve=relaxed']
> ----
>
> According to your policy document (and the code, as far as I can tell),
> this will come up as "strict", even though the user has specifically
> asked for it to be set to "relaxed".

Again, this is from our design and discussion.

>
> This interface doesn't make any sense to me.  Why, if the "global

If you have any objection to our solution, and if you can't find any 
reasonable answer from our design, just please ping Jan or Kevin because 
I'm really not that person who can address this kind of change at this 
point in this high level.

Thanks
Tiejun

> default" is set to "relaxed", do individual devices still default to
> "strict"?  And why is it useful at the domain level to set a
> configuration that can't be overridden on a per-device basis?
>
>   -George
>
>
>
>
>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-01 11:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 114+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-23  9:57 [v4][PATCH 00/19] Fix RMRR Tiejun Chen
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 01/19] xen: introduce XENMEM_reserved_device_memory_map Tiejun Chen
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 02/19] xen/x86/p2m: introduce set_identity_p2m_entry Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25  9:59   ` Tim Deegan
2015-07-01 15:43   ` George Dunlap
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 03/19] xen/vtd: create RMRR mapping Tiejun Chen
2015-06-23 10:12   ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-24  1:11     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-24  6:48       ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-24  7:26         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-24  7:33           ` Jan Beulich
2015-06-30 10:40             ` George Dunlap
2015-06-30 11:19               ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 04/19] xen/passthrough: extend hypercall to support rdm reservation policy Tiejun Chen
2015-06-30 11:08   ` George Dunlap
2015-06-30 11:24     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-30 14:20       ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01  1:11         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-01 10:02           ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01 10:47             ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-01 14:39               ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01 15:06                 ` Julien Grall
2015-07-02  6:50                 ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-06 14:55                   ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-07  6:36                     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-06 10:34               ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-06 10:56                 ` George Dunlap
2015-07-06 10:56                 ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-06 11:39                   ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-01 16:30   ` George Dunlap
2015-07-02  8:49     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-06 14:52       ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-07  6:37         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 05/19] xen: enable XENMEM_memory_map in hvm Tiejun Chen
2015-07-01 16:32   ` George Dunlap
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 06/19] hvmloader: get guest memory map into memory_map[] Tiejun Chen
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 07/19] hvmloader/pci: skip reserved ranges Tiejun Chen
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 08/19] hvmloader/e820: construct guest e820 table Tiejun Chen
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 09/19] tools/libxc: Expose new hypercall xc_reserved_device_memory_map Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25 10:44   ` Wei Liu
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 10/19] tools: extend xc_assign_device() to support rdm reservation policy Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25 10:54   ` Wei Liu
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 11/19] tools: introduce some new parameters to set rdm policy Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25 11:38   ` Wei Liu
2015-06-25 12:13   ` Ian Campbell
2015-06-26  8:38     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-26  8:57       ` Ian Campbell
2015-06-26  9:36         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-26 12:06           ` Wei Liu
2015-06-29  1:01             ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-30  3:08           ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-30  8:30             ` Ian Campbell
2015-06-30  9:38               ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-07 11:36                 ` Ian Campbell
2015-06-25 12:31   ` Ian Jackson
2015-06-30  3:07     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-30 15:54   ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01  1:16     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-01 10:07       ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01 10:26         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-01 10:57           ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01 11:16             ` Chen, Tiejun [this message]
2015-07-01 13:29               ` George Dunlap
2015-07-02  1:11                 ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-02  4:47                   ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-02  9:22                   ` George Dunlap
2015-07-02 10:01                     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-02 10:28                       ` George Dunlap
2015-07-02 11:32                         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-06 13:34                 ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-06 13:51                   ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-06 14:21                     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-06 14:29                       ` George Dunlap
2015-07-06 14:34                         ` Jan Beulich
2015-07-06 14:46                           ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-06 17:16                             ` Wei Liu
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 12/19] tools/libxl: passes rdm reservation policy Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25 11:37   ` Wei Liu
2015-06-25 12:15   ` Ian Campbell
2015-06-26  8:53     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-26  9:01       ` Ian Campbell
2015-06-26  9:28         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-25 12:33   ` Ian Jackson
2015-06-30  2:14     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-30 15:56   ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01  1:23     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-01 10:22       ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01 10:56         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-30 16:11   ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01  1:30     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-07-01 10:31       ` George Dunlap
2015-07-02  9:27         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 13/19] tools/libxc: check to set args.mmio_size before call xc_hvm_build Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25 11:08   ` Wei Liu
2015-06-26  0:56     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-26 12:07       ` Wei Liu
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 14/19] tools/libxl: detect and avoid conflicts with RDM Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25 11:23   ` Wei Liu
2015-06-26  5:45     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-26 12:13       ` Wei Liu
2015-06-29  6:36         ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 15/19] tools: introduce a new parameter to set a predefined rdm boundary Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25 11:27   ` Wei Liu
2015-06-26  6:54     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 16/19] tools/libxl: extend XENMEM_set_memory_map Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25 11:33   ` Wei Liu
2015-06-26  7:13     ` Chen, Tiejun
2015-06-26 12:14       ` Wei Liu
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 17/19] xen/vtd: enable USB device assignment Tiejun Chen
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 18/19] xen/vtd: prevent from assign the device with shared rmrr Tiejun Chen
2015-06-23  9:57 ` [v4][PATCH 19/19] tools: parse to enable new rdm policy parameters Tiejun Chen
2015-06-25 11:35   ` Wei Liu
2015-06-30 16:30   ` George Dunlap
2015-07-01  1:31     ` Chen, Tiejun

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=5593CC19.9020200@intel.com \
    --to=tiejun.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=ian.campbell@citrix.com \
    --cc=ian.jackson@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
    --cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.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.