kvm.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com>
To: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kvm@vger.kernel.org, jjherne@linux.ibm.com, freude@linux.ibm.com,
	borntraeger@de.ibm.com, cohuck@redhat.com,
	mjrosato@linux.ibm.com, alex.williamson@redhat.com,
	kwankhede@nvidia.com, fiuczy@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 08/15] s390/vfio-ap: keep track of active guests
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 2022 16:58:13 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fcce7cc6-6ac7-b22a-a957-80e59a0f4e83@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211230043322.2ba19bbd.pasic@linux.ibm.com>



On 12/29/21 22:33, Halil Pasic wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2021 11:23:25 -0400
> Tony Krowiak <akrowiak@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
>> The vfio_ap device driver registers for notification when the pointer to
>> the KVM object for a guest is set. Let's store the KVM pointer as well as
>> the pointer to the mediated device when the KVM pointer is set.
> [..]
>
>
>> struct ap_matrix_dev {
>>          ...
>>          struct rw_semaphore guests_lock;
>>          struct list_head guests;
>>         ...
>> }
>>
>> The 'guests_lock' field is a r/w semaphore to control access to the
>> 'guests' field. The 'guests' field is a list of ap_guest
>> structures containing the KVM and matrix_mdev pointers for each active
>> guest. An ap_guest structure will be stored into the list whenever the
>> vfio_ap device driver is notified that the KVM pointer has been set and
>> removed when notified that the KVM pointer has been cleared.
>>
> Is this about the field or about the list including all the nodes? This
> reads lie guests_lock only protects the head element, which makes no
> sense to me. Because of how these lists work.

It locks the list, I can rewrite the description.

>
> The narrowest scope that could make sense is all the list_head stuff
> in the entire list. I.e. one would only need the lock to traverse or
> manipulate the list, while the payload would still be subject to
> the matrix_dev->lock mutex.

The matrix_dev->guests lock is needed whenever the kvm->lock
is needed because the struct ap_guest object is created and the
struct kvm assigned to it when the kvm pointer is set
(vfio_ap_mdev_set_kvm function). So, in order to access the
ap_guest object and retrieve the kvm pointer, we have to ensure
the ap_guest_object is still available. The fact we can get the
kvm pointer from the ap_matrix_mdev object just makes things
more efficient - i.e., we won't have to traverse the list.

Whenever the kvm->lock and matrix_dev->lock mutexes must
be held, the order is:

     matrix_dev->guests_lock
     matrix_dev->guests->kvm->lock
     matrix_dev->lock

There are times where all three locks are not required; for example,
the handle_pqap and vfio_ap_mdev_probe/remove functions only
require the matrix_dev->lock because it does not need to lock kvm.

>
> [..]
>
>> +struct ap_guest {
>> +	struct kvm *kvm;
>> +	struct list_head node;
>> +};
>> +
>>   /**
>>    * struct ap_matrix_dev - Contains the data for the matrix device.
>>    *
>> @@ -39,6 +44,9 @@
>>    *		single ap_matrix_mdev device. It's quite coarse but we don't
>>    *		expect much contention.
>>    * @vfio_ap_drv: the vfio_ap device driver
>> + * @guests_lock: r/w semaphore for protecting access to @guests
>> + * @guests:	list of guests (struct ap_guest) using AP devices bound to the
>> + *		vfio_ap device driver.
> Please compare the above. Also if it is only about the access to the
> list, then you could drop the lock right after create, and not keep it
> till the very end of vfio_ap_mdev_set_kvm(). Right?

That would be true if it only controlled access to the list, but as I
explained above, that is not its sole purpose.

>
> In any case I'm skeptical about this whole struct ap_guest business. To
> me, it looks like something that just makes things more obscure and
> complicated without any real benefit.

I'm open to other ideas, but you'll have to come up with a way
to take the kvm->lock before the matrix_mdev->lock in the
vfio_ap_mdev_probe_queue and vfio_ap_mdev_remove_queue
functions where we don't have access to the ap_matrix_mdev
object to which the APQN is assigned and has the pointer to the
kvm object.

In order to retrieve the matrix_mdev, we need the matrix_dev->lock.
In order to hot plug/unplug the queue, we need the kvm->lock.
There's your catch-22 that needs to be solved. This design is my
attempt to solve that.

>
> Regards,
> Halil
>
>>    */
>>   struct ap_matrix_dev {
>>   	struct device device;
>> @@ -47,6 +55,8 @@ struct ap_matrix_dev {
>>   	struct list_head mdev_list;
>>   	struct mutex lock;
>>   	struct ap_driver  *vfio_ap_drv;
>> +	struct rw_semaphore guests_lock;
>> +	struct list_head guests;
>>   };
>>   
>>   extern struct ap_matrix_dev *matrix_dev;


  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-11 21:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-10-21 15:23 [PATCH v17 00/15] s390/vfio-ap: dynamic configuration support Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 01/15] s390/vfio-ap: Set pqap hook when vfio_ap module is loaded Tony Krowiak
2021-12-27  8:21   ` Halil Pasic
2022-01-11 21:13     ` Tony Krowiak
2022-01-04 16:22   ` Jason J. Herne
2022-01-11 17:29     ` Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 02/15] s390/vfio-ap: use new AP bus interface to search for queue devices Tony Krowiak
2021-12-27  8:25   ` Halil Pasic
2022-01-11 17:32     ` Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 03/15] s390/vfio-ap: move probe and remove callbacks to vfio_ap_ops.c Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 04/15] s390/vfio-ap: manage link between queue struct and matrix mdev Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 05/15] s390/vfio-ap: introduce shadow APCB Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 06/15] s390/vfio-ap: refresh guest's APCB by filtering APQNs assigned to mdev Tony Krowiak
2021-12-27  8:53   ` Halil Pasic
2022-01-11 21:19     ` Tony Krowiak
2022-01-12 11:52       ` Halil Pasic
2022-01-15  0:31         ` Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 07/15] s390/vfio-ap: allow assignment of unavailable AP queues to mdev device Tony Krowiak
2021-12-27  9:06   ` Halil Pasic
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 08/15] s390/vfio-ap: keep track of active guests Tony Krowiak
2021-12-30  2:04   ` Halil Pasic
2022-01-11 21:27     ` Tony Krowiak
2021-12-30  3:33   ` Halil Pasic
2022-01-11 21:58     ` Tony Krowiak [this message]
2022-01-11 22:19       ` Tony Krowiak
2022-01-12 14:25       ` Halil Pasic
2022-01-15  0:29         ` Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 09/15] s390/vfio-ap: allow hot plug/unplug of AP resources using mdev device Tony Krowiak
2022-01-09 21:36   ` Halil Pasic
2022-01-11 22:42     ` Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 10/15] s390/vfio-ap: reset queues after adapter/domain unassignment Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 11/15] s390/ap: driver callback to indicate resource in use Tony Krowiak
2021-11-04 11:27   ` Harald Freudenberger
2021-11-04 15:48     ` Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 12/15] s390/vfio-ap: implement in-use callback for vfio_ap driver Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 13/15] s390/vfio-ap: sysfs attribute to display the guest's matrix Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 14/15] s390/ap: notify drivers on config changed and scan complete callbacks Tony Krowiak
2021-11-04 12:06   ` Harald Freudenberger
2021-11-04 15:50     ` Tony Krowiak
2021-11-05  8:23       ` Harald Freudenberger
2021-11-05 13:15         ` Harald Freudenberger
2021-11-08 14:27           ` Tony Krowiak
2021-11-08 14:26         ` Tony Krowiak
2022-02-04 10:43   ` Halil Pasic
2022-02-07 19:39     ` Tony Krowiak
2022-02-08  1:38       ` Halil Pasic
2022-02-08  3:27         ` Tony Krowiak
2021-10-21 15:23 ` [PATCH v17 15/15] s390/vfio-ap: update docs to include dynamic config support Tony Krowiak
2021-10-27 14:24 ` [PATCH v17 00/15] s390/vfio-ap: dynamic configuration support Tony Krowiak
2021-11-02 19:23   ` Tony Krowiak
2021-11-15 15:45 ` Tony Krowiak
2021-11-22 16:12 ` Tony Krowiak

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=fcce7cc6-6ac7-b22a-a957-80e59a0f4e83@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=akrowiak@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
    --cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
    --cc=fiuczy@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=freude@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=jjherne@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=kvm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kwankhede@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=pasic@linux.ibm.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).