From: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
To: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
Cc: kexec@lists.infradead.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
linux-pci@vger.kernel.org,
Adithya Jayachandran <ajayachandra@nvidia.com>,
Alexander Graf <graf@amazon.com>,
Alex Williamson <alex@shazbot.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>, Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Jacob Pan <jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Josh Hilke <jrhilke@google.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>,
Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Parav Pandit <parav@nvidia.com>,
Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@soleen.com>,
Pratyush Yadav <pratyush@kernel.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@nvidia.com>,
Samiullah Khawaja <skhawaja@google.com>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com>, William Tu <witu@nvidia.com>,
Yi Liu <yi.l.liu@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 03/12] PCI: liveupdate: Track incoming preserved PCI devices
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2026 10:08:28 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aiPxVxu2sUVQfG9D@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260522202410.3104264-4-dmatlack@google.com>
On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 08:24:01PM +0000, David Matlack wrote:
> During PCI enumeration, the previous kernel might have passed state about
> devices that were preserved across kexec. The PCI core needs to fetch
> this state to identify which devices are "incoming" and require special
> handling.
>
> Add pci_liveupdate_setup_device() which is called during device setup
> to fetch the serialized state (struct pci_ser) from the Live Update
> Orchestrator. The first time this happens, pci_flb_retrieve() will run
> and convert the array of pci_dev_ser structs into an xarray so that it
> can be looked up efficiently.
>
> If a device is found in the xarray, the PCI core stores a pointer to its
> state in dev->liveupdate_incoming and holds a reference to the incoming
> FLB until pci_liveupdate_finish() is called by the driver.
>
> This ensures proper lifecycle management for incoming preserved devices
> and allows the PCI core and drivers to apply specific Live Update
> logic to them in subsequent commits.
>
> Drivers can check if a device is an incoming preserved device (e.g.
> during probe) by calling pci_liveupdate_is_incoming().
>
> CONFIG_64BIT is now required to enable CONFIG_PCI_LIVEUPDATE so that the
> domain and bdf can be guaranteed to fit in an unsigned long and be used
> as the xarray key.
>
> Signed-off-by: David Matlack <dmatlack@google.com>
> ---
> MAINTAINERS | 1 +
> drivers/pci/Kconfig | 2 +-
> drivers/pci/liveupdate.c | 230 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> drivers/pci/liveupdate.h | 5 +
> drivers/pci/probe.c | 3 +
> include/linux/pci_liveupdate.h | 13 ++
> 6 files changed, 251 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS
> index 6c618830cf61..0e262c0ceb43 100644
> --- a/MAINTAINERS
> +++ b/MAINTAINERS
> @@ -20537,6 +20537,7 @@ L: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
> S: Maintained
> T: git git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/liveupdate/linux.git
> F: drivers/pci/liveupdate.c
> +F: drivers/pci/liveupdate.h
> F: include/linux/kho/abi/pci.h
> F: include/linux/pci_liveupdate.h
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/Kconfig b/drivers/pci/Kconfig
> index 10c9b65aa242..e68ae5c172d4 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/pci/Kconfig
> @@ -330,7 +330,7 @@ config VGA_ARB_MAX_GPUS
>
> config PCI_LIVEUPDATE
> bool "PCI Live Update Support"
> - depends on PCI && LIVEUPDATE
> + depends on PCI && LIVEUPDATE && 64BIT
I see that the static assertions in Patch 1 work because of the 64BIT
enforcement here. In that case, should we have the assertions check u64?
> help
> Enable PCI core support for preserving PCI devices across Live
> Update. This, in combination with support in a device's driver,
>
[...]
> static int pci_flb_retrieve(struct liveupdate_flb_op_args *args)
> {
> - args->obj = phys_to_virt(args->data);
> + struct pci_ser *ser = phys_to_virt(args->data);
> + struct pci_flb_incoming *incoming;
> + int ret = -ENOMEM;
> + u32 i;
> +
> + incoming = kmalloc_obj(*incoming);
> + if (!incoming)
> + goto err_restore_free;
> +
> + incoming->ser = ser;
> + xa_init(&incoming->xa);
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < incoming->ser->max_nr_devices; i++) {
> + struct pci_dev_ser *dev_ser = &incoming->ser->devices[i];
> + unsigned long key;
> +
> + if (!dev_ser->refcount)
> + continue;
> +
> + key = pci_ser_xa_key(dev_ser->domain, dev_ser->bdf);
> + ret = xa_insert(&incoming->xa, key, dev_ser, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_xa_destroy;
> + }
> +
> + args->obj = incoming;
> return 0;
> +
> +err_xa_destroy:
> + xa_destroy(&incoming->xa);
> + kfree(incoming);
> +err_restore_free:
> + kho_restore_free(ser);
I tend to partly agree with Sashiko[1] here.. it raises a policy-hole.
We may need a policy here, the options I have in mind are:
1. Retrieve shall ONLY be tried once, if it fails (like -ENOMEM in the
xArray alloc), it's a liveupdate failure. We can't retry liveupdate.
2. Retrying retrieve is allowed.
The only downside with option 1 is, the user may want flexibility due to
certain subsystems OR may choose NOT to use the proposed LUOd and instead
have its own user-space component which might try funny things or have a
different use-case.
In such a situation, the system may have transiently run out of memory
during the kexec transition (for e.g. a subsystem uses GFP_ATOMIC to
allocate memory and temporarily runs out of the atomic pool). [Note we
removed it in IOMMU v1 [2] but subsystems may have a use-case for it]
If the kernel frees the KHO page on the first failure, it removes any
chance of recovery. :/
Thus, it might make sense to let the user decide if it wants to fail the
liveupdate or retry again based on the failure type / source?
[...]
The changes LGTM, except for policy-based, kho_restore_free discussion.
Reviewed-by: Pranjal Shrivastava <praan@google.com>
Thanks,
Praan
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260522211333.D56A21F000E9@smtp.kernel.org/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260203220948.2176157-2-skhawaja@google.com/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-06 10:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-22 20:23 [PATCH v6 00/12] PCI: liveupdate: PCI core support for Live Update David Matlack
2026-05-22 20:23 ` [PATCH v6 01/12] PCI: liveupdate: Set up FLB handler for the PCI core David Matlack
2026-06-05 5:41 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 02/12] PCI: liveupdate: Track outgoing preserved PCI devices David Matlack
2026-06-05 6:11 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 03/12] PCI: liveupdate: Track incoming " David Matlack
2026-06-06 10:08 ` Pranjal Shrivastava [this message]
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 04/12] PCI: liveupdate: Document driver binding responsibilities David Matlack
2026-05-25 15:35 ` Pratyush Yadav
2026-06-06 10:20 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 05/12] PCI: liveupdate: Keep bus numbers constant during Live Update David Matlack
2026-06-06 11:10 ` Pranjal Shrivastava
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 06/12] PCI: liveupdate: Auto-preserve upstream bridges across " David Matlack
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 07/12] PCI: Refactor matching logic for pci_dev_acs_ops David Matlack
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 08/12] PCI: liveupdate: Inherit ACS flags in incoming preserved devices David Matlack
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 09/12] PCI: liveupdate: Inherit ARI Forwarding Enable on preserved bridges David Matlack
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 10/12] PCI: liveupdate: Freeze preservation status during shutdown David Matlack
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 11/12] PCI: liveupdate: Do not disable bus mastering on preserved devices during kexec David Matlack
2026-05-22 20:24 ` [PATCH v6 12/12] Documentation: PCI: Add documentation for Live Update David Matlack
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=aiPxVxu2sUVQfG9D@google.com \
--to=praan@google.com \
--cc=ajayachandra@nvidia.com \
--cc=alex@shazbot.org \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=chrisl@kernel.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dmatlack@google.com \
--cc=graf@amazon.com \
--cc=jacob.pan@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=jrhilke@google.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=leonro@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas@wunner.de \
--cc=parav@nvidia.com \
--cc=pasha.tatashin@soleen.com \
--cc=pratyush@kernel.org \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=saeedm@nvidia.com \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=skhawaja@google.com \
--cc=vipinsh@google.com \
--cc=witu@nvidia.com \
--cc=yi.l.liu@intel.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