From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@siemens.com>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>
Cc: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>, kvm <kvm@vger.kernel.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 9/9] KVM: Allow host IRQ sharing for passed-through PCI 2.3 devices
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 14:35:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CD94E26.3030007@siemens.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4CD94C5A.1080504@redhat.com>
Am 09.11.2010 14:27, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 11/08/2010 01:21 PM, 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. This feature is optional, user space has to
>> request it explicitly. Moreover, user space can inform us about its view
>> of PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE so that we can avoid unmasking the interrupt
>> and signaling it if the guest masked it via the PCI config space.
>>
>
> It's a pity this cannot be done transparently. We could detect multiple
> devices sharing the line,
Even that is not possible. Assigned or host devices may be activated
after we registered exclusively, pushing the breakage from VM start-up
to a different operation.
> but what about PCI_COMMAND_INTX_DISABLE?
>
> Perhaps we can hook the kernel's handler for this bit?
Some IRQ registration notifier that would allow us to reregister our
handler with IRQ sharing support? Maybe.
>
>>
>> /* Depends on KVM_CAP_IOMMU */
>> #define KVM_DEV_ASSIGN_ENABLE_IOMMU (1<< 0)
>> +/* The following two depend on KVM_CAP_PCI_2_3 */
>> +#define KVM_DEV_ASSIGN_PCI_2_3 (1<< 1)
>> +#define KVM_DEV_ASSIGN_MASK_INTX (1<< 2)
>> +
>> +If KVM_DEV_ASSIGN_PCI_2_3 is set, the kernel will manage legacy INTx interrupts
>> +via the PCI-2.3-compliant device-level mask, thus enable IRQ sharing with other
>> +assigned devices or host devices. KVM_DEV_ASSIGN_MASK_INTX specifies the
>> +guest's view on the INTx mask, see KVM_ASSIGN_SET_INTX_MASK for details.
>>
>> 4.48 KVM_DEASSIGN_PCI_DEVICE
>>
>> @@ -1263,6 +1271,23 @@ struct kvm_assigned_msix_entry {
>> __u16 padding[3];
>> };
>>
>> +5.54 KVM_ASSIGN_SET_INTX_MASK
>
> 4.54?
Of course.
>
> (54? wow.)
And I don't think all IOCTLs are already documented (though the majority
now).
>
>> +
>> +Capability: KVM_CAP_PCI_2_3
>> +Architectures: x86
>> +Type: vm ioctl
>> +Parameters: struct kvm_assigned_pci_dev (in)
>> +Returns: 0 on success, -1 on error
>> +
>> +Informs the kernel about the guest's view on the INTx mask. As long as the
>> +guest masks the legacy INTx, the kernel will refrain from unmasking it at
>> +hardware level and will not assert the guest's IRQ line. User space is still
>> +responsible for applying this state to the assigned device's real config space.
>
> What if userspace lies?
User space problem. We will at worst receive one IRQ, mask it, and then
user space need to react again.
>
>> +
>> +See KVM_ASSIGN_DEV_IRQ for the data structure. The target device is specified
>> +by assigned_dev_id. In the flags field, only KVM_DEV_ASSIGN_MASK_INTX is
>> +evaluated.
>> +
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/kvm_host.h b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> index fe83eb0..7f1627c 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/kvm_host.h
>> @@ -468,6 +468,7 @@ 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;
>> @@ -477,6 +478,7 @@ struct kvm_assigned_dev_kernel {
>> struct pci_dev *dev;
>> struct kvm *kvm;
>> spinlock_t intx_lock;
>> + struct mutex intx_mask_lock;
>> char irq_name[32];
>> };
>
> I saw no reason this can't be a spinlock, but perhaps I missed
> something. This would allow us to avoid srcu, which is slightly more
> expensive than rcu. Since pci 2.3 assigned devices are not a major use
> case, I'd like not to penalize the mainstream users for this.
The lock has to be held across kvm_set_irq, which is the potentially
expensive (O(n), n == number of VCPUs) operation.
>
> This patch undoes some of the niceness of the previous patches, but I
> have no alternative to suggest.
>
Yes, it surely does not make things simpler. But much of the complexity
is avoided during runtime when MSIs are used.
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT T DE IT 1
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-09 13:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-08 11:21 [PATCH v4 0/9] KVM: Improve IRQ assignment for device passthrough Jan Kiszka
2010-11-08 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 1/9] KVM: Fix srcu struct leakage Jan Kiszka
2010-11-08 17:00 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-08 17:32 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-08 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 2/9] KVM: Switch IRQ subsystem to SRCU Jan Kiszka
2010-11-09 10:49 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-09 11:21 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-08 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 3/9] KVM: Clear assigned guest IRQ on release Jan Kiszka
2010-11-09 10:58 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-09 11:20 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-09 18:36 ` Alex Williamson
2010-11-10 6:53 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-26 10:36 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2010-11-08 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 4/9] KVM: Switch assigned device IRQ forwarding to threaded handler Jan Kiszka
2010-11-09 12:26 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-09 12:36 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-08 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 5/9] KVM: Refactor IRQ names of assigned devices Jan Kiszka
2010-11-08 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 6/9] KVM: Save/restore state of assigned PCI device Jan Kiszka
2010-11-09 12:35 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-09 13:29 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-09 13:36 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-09 13:44 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-09 13:46 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-09 16:41 ` Don Dutile
2010-11-08 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 7/9] KVM: Clean up kvm_vm_ioctl_assigned_device Jan Kiszka
2010-11-08 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 8/9] KVM: Document device assigment API Jan Kiszka
2010-11-08 11:21 ` [PATCH v4 9/9] KVM: Allow host IRQ sharing for passed-through PCI 2.3 devices Jan Kiszka
2010-11-09 13:27 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-09 13:35 ` Jan Kiszka [this message]
2010-11-09 13:41 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-09 14:11 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-09 14:20 ` Avi Kivity
2010-11-16 16:55 ` [PATCH v4 0/9] KVM: Improve IRQ assignment for device passthrough Marcelo Tosatti
2010-11-16 18:26 ` Jan Kiszka
2010-11-17 8:25 ` 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=4CD94E26.3030007@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox