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 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 smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6AFF6C3ABAC for ; Tue, 6 May 2025 13:41:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uCIXN-0007zn-WA; Tue, 06 May 2025 09:40:46 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uCIXM-0007zf-Rt for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 May 2025 09:40:44 -0400 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de ([195.135.223.130]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uCIXK-0001pn-V3 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 06 May 2025 09:40:44 -0400 Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org [IPv6:2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE41021219; Tue, 6 May 2025 13:40:40 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1746538840; h=from:from:reply-to: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=6Axh9iIwugGHQTOEQUStY2Kd0seJ4D7h1OrpGETWxyQ=; b=opmZRhMEnalFOzSPi36na2T1eejBzyPliVZ4BJ/IV8VklekFoqdiuMXz6bDgxiFk+aYKf5 Egd5MF+ge/1br/DiDaUU3P57a1oErlJV057v070f7EGGdAz1V1DFvoWQZgDt0aDYwRFs7m unwMsLJ62p0bmxz2f+4NMOPUwG4VpLM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1746538840; h=from:from:reply-to: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=6Axh9iIwugGHQTOEQUStY2Kd0seJ4D7h1OrpGETWxyQ=; b=6zKuAXgM9AiUqOYTWkYNgxN/yoYtn9VcZn2fJrsYCPy6x1pTMtELuqLsNOb05R5L2Icguv JVX54soZDf9jxmAw== Authentication-Results: smtp-out1.suse.de; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_rsa header.b=opmZRhME; dkim=pass header.d=suse.de header.s=susede2_ed25519 header.b=6zKuAXgM DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1746538840; h=from:from:reply-to: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=6Axh9iIwugGHQTOEQUStY2Kd0seJ4D7h1OrpGETWxyQ=; b=opmZRhMEnalFOzSPi36na2T1eejBzyPliVZ4BJ/IV8VklekFoqdiuMXz6bDgxiFk+aYKf5 Egd5MF+ge/1br/DiDaUU3P57a1oErlJV057v070f7EGGdAz1V1DFvoWQZgDt0aDYwRFs7m unwMsLJ62p0bmxz2f+4NMOPUwG4VpLM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1746538840; h=from:from:reply-to: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=6Axh9iIwugGHQTOEQUStY2Kd0seJ4D7h1OrpGETWxyQ=; b=6zKuAXgM9AiUqOYTWkYNgxN/yoYtn9VcZn2fJrsYCPy6x1pTMtELuqLsNOb05R5L2Icguv JVX54soZDf9jxmAw== Received: from imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48AB5137CF; Tue, 6 May 2025 13:40:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167]) by imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org with ESMTPSA id v6NFAlgRGmjsQQAAD6G6ig (envelope-from ); Tue, 06 May 2025 13:40:40 +0000 From: Fabiano Rosas To: Prasad Pandit Cc: Peter Xu , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, berrange@redhat.com, Prasad Pandit Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/7] Allow to enable multifd and postcopy migration together In-Reply-To: References: <20250411114534.3370816-1-ppandit@redhat.com> <87ecxteym0.fsf@suse.de> <87bjswfeis.fsf@suse.de> <87y0vyepta.fsf@suse.de> <87v7qeg9r3.fsf@suse.de> Date: Tue, 06 May 2025 10:40:37 -0300 Message-ID: <87plglg8mi.fsf@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: CE41021219 X-Rspamd-Action: no action X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.51 / 50.00]; BAYES_HAM(-3.00)[100.00%]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-1.000]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[]; DKIM_SIGNED(0.00)[suse.de:s=susede2_rsa,suse.de:s=susede2_ed25519]; FUZZY_BLOCKED(0.00)[rspamd.com]; RBL_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:104:10:150:64:97:from]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[suse.de:+]; RCPT_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; DNSWL_BLOCKED(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167:received]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[2a07:de40:b281:106:10:150:64:167:received]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:25478, ipnet:::/0, country:RU]; DBL_BLOCKED_OPENRESOLVER(0.00)[suse.de:dkim, suse.de:mid, suse.de:email, imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:rdns, imap1.dmz-prg2.suse.org:helo] X-Rspamd-Server: rspamd1.dmz-prg2.suse.org Received-SPF: pass client-ip=195.135.223.130; envelope-from=farosas@suse.de; helo=smtp-out1.suse.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=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: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Prasad Pandit writes: > Hi, > > On Tue, 6 May 2025 at 00:34, Fabiano Rosas wrote: >> >> # Running /ppc64/migration/multifd+postcopy/tcp/plain/cancel >> >> # Using machine type: pseries-10.0 >> >> # starting QEMU: exec ./qemu-system-ppc64 -qtest >> >> # { >> >> # "error": { >> >> # "class": "GenericError", >> >> # "desc": "Postcopy is not supported: Userfaultfd not available: Function not implemented" >> >> # } >> >> # } >> > > === > [ ~]# > ... > PPC KVM module is not loaded. Try modprobe kvm_hv. > qemu-system-ppc64: -accel kvm: failed to initialize kvm: Invalid argument > qemu-system-ppc64: -accel kvm: ioctl(KVM_CREATE_VM) failed: Invalid argument > PPC KVM module is not loaded. Try modprobe kvm_hv. > qemu-system-ppc64: -accel kvm: failed to initialize kvm: Invalid argument The tests should fallback to TCG and that should be enough to reproduce this issue. I don't think you even need a ppc machine, the CI uses a x86_64 container. > [ ~]# > > [ ~]# modprobe kvm-hv > modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'kvm_hv': No such device > [ ~]# > [ ~]# ls -l /dev/kvm /dev/userfaultfd > crw-rw-rw-. 1 root kvm 10, 232 May 6 07:06 /dev/kvm > crw----rw-. 1 root root 10, 123 May 6 06:30 /dev/userfaultfd > [ ~]# > === > > * I tried to reproduce this issue across multiple Power9 and Power10 > machines, but I -qtest could not run due to above errors. > There are several considerations to take into account with ppc64le, you probably have either a distro version that doesn't provide the KVM module or a machine that doesn't have KVM support at all. >> We're missing a check on has_uffd for the multifd+postcopy tests. > > * If it is about missing the 'e->has_uffd' check, does that mean > Postcopy tests are skipped on this machine because 'e->has_uffd' is > false? > I haven't verified, but yes, the ones that check has_uffd should be skipped. I don't think you need to go to the extent to reproduce this. Look at migrate_caps_check(), whenever postcopy-ram is enabled for the first time, it will call postcopy_ram_supported_by_host(), so it follows that any test that enables postcopy-ram must first check env->has_uffd. > > Thank you. > --- > - Prasad