From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7E4AC4338F for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 09:40:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8826C610CE for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 09:40:54 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 8826C610CE Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:53778 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIpOv-0007HD-QS for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 05:40:53 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37708) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIpNz-0006EZ-VV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 05:39:55 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:29282) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIpNw-0000gb-K2 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 05:39:54 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1629884390; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=7tTmTdvAMxkrCGqlbrtvc/1jqXyYkBh/mpPSnZTYdj8=; b=eGVoq76v3+AJo71H/khyJJE4m0c0SGcs3wk5KM2kSyHYW67339S1XZKDPiRXX6PnrFKnvA B2LtiW/Cr9zb8pfnGgoOfhfKlCm/SruxZCuZsFSy7qkIP3T6SyXGFc6E90w8wIMde+ZD6x pS88GN//EY94cDzUMhBOz/ROt2bgl2Y= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-440-Xa-kzSp1NZuV_Z1p7g9YGQ-1; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 05:39:49 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Xa-kzSp1NZuV_Z1p7g9YGQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D260B8799E0 for ; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 09:39:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blackfin.pond.sub.org (ovpn-112-4.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B6335D741; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 09:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blackfin.pond.sub.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id BF32C11380A9; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 11:39:32 +0200 (CEST) From: Markus Armbruster To: Peter Xu Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] vl: Prioritize realizations of devices References: <20210818194217.110451-1-peterx@redhat.com> <20210818194318.110993-1-peterx@redhat.com> <20210823184912.mazqfn7gurntj7ld@habkost.net> <20210823210703.cikdkhvyeqqypaqa@habkost.net> <20210823215623.bagyo3oojdpk3byj@habkost.net> Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 11:39:32 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Peter Xu's message of "Mon, 23 Aug 2021 19:05:52 -0400") Message-ID: <8735qxhnhn.fsf@dusky.pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.15 Authentication-Results: relay.mimecast.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=CUSA124A263 smtp.mailfrom=armbru@redhat.com X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.133.124; envelope-from=armbru@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -34 X-Spam_score: -3.5 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.747, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "Daniel P . =?utf-8?Q?Berrang=C3=A9?=" , Eduardo Habkost , "Michael S . Tsirkin" , Jason Wang , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" , Eric Auger , Alex Williamson , Paolo Bonzini Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Peter Xu writes: > On Mon, Aug 23, 2021 at 05:56:23PM -0400, Eduardo Habkost wrote: >> I don't have any other example, but I assume address assignment >> based on ordering is a common pattern in device code. >> >> I would take a very close and careful look at the devices with >> non-default vmsd priority. If you can prove that the 13 device >> types with non-default priority are all order-insensitive, a >> custom sort function as you describe might be safe. > > Besides virtio-mem-pci, there'll also similar devfn issue with all > MIG_PRI_PCI_BUS, as they'll be allocated just like other pci devices. Say, > below two cmdlines will generate different pci topology too: > > $ qemu-system-x86_64 -device pcie-root-port,chassis=0 \ > -device pcie-root-port,chassis=1 \ > -device virtio-net-pci > > And: > > $ qemu-system-x86_64 -device pcie-root-port,chassis=0 \ > -device virtio-net-pci > -device pcie-root-port,chassis=1 \ > > This cannot be solved by keeping priority==0 ordering. > > After a second thought, I think I was initially wrong on seeing migration > priority and device realization the same problem. > > For example, for live migration we have a requirement on PCI_BUS being migrated > earlier than MIG_PRI_IOMMU because there's bus number information required > because IOMMU relies on the bus number to find address spaces. However that's > definitely not a requirement for device realizations, say, realizing vIOMMU > after pci buses are fine (bus assigned during bios). > > I've probably messed up with the ideas (though they really look alike!). Sorry > about that. > > Since the only ordering constraint so far is IOMMU vs all the rest of devices, > I'll introduce a new priority mechanism and only make sure vIOMMUs are realized > earlier. That'll also avoid other implications on pci devfn allocations. > > Will rework a new version tomorrow. Thanks a lot for all the comments, Is it really a good idea to magically reorder device realization just to make a non-working command line work? Why can't we just fail the non-working command line in a way that tells users how to get a working one? We have way too much ordering magic already... If we decide we want more magic, then I'd argue for *dependencies* instead of priorities. Dependencies are specific and local: $this needs to go after $that because $reasons. Priorities are unspecific and global.