From: George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
<stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen/pci: Deal with toolstack missing an 'XenbusStateClosing'.
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 10:00:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51B6E711.2000001@eu.citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51B6EDDF02000078000DCFB7@nat28.tlf.novell.com>
On 06/11/2013 08:29 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 10.06.13 at 23:06, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com> wrote:
>> There are two tool-stack that can instruct the Xen PCI frontend
>> and backend to change states: 'xm' (Python code with a daemon),
>> and 'xl' (C library - does not keep state changes).
>>
>> With the 'xm', the path to disconnect a PCI device (xm pci-detach
>> <guest> <BDF>)is:
>>
>> 4(Connected)->7(Reconfiguring*)-> 8(Reconfigured)-> 4(Connected)->5(Closing*).
>>
>> The * is for states that the tool-stack sets. For 'xl', it is similar:
>>
>> 4(Connected)->7(Reconfiguring*)-> 8(Reconfigured)-> 4(Connected)
>>
>> Both of them also tear down the XenBus structure, so the backend
>> state ends up going in the 3(Initialised) and calls pcifront_xenbus_remove.
>>
>> When a PCI device is plugged in (xm pci-attach <guest> <BDF>)
>> both of them follow the same pattern:
>> 2(InitWait*), 3(Initialized*), 4(Connected*)->4(Connected).
>>
>> [xen-pcifront ignores the 2,3 state changes and only acts when
>> 4 (Connected) has been reached]
>>
>> The problem is that git commit 3d925320e9e2de162bd138bf97816bda8c3f71be
>> ("xen/pcifront: Use Xen-SWIOTLB when initting if required") introduced
>> a mechanism to initialize the SWIOTLB when the Xen PCI front moves to
>> Connected state. It also had some aggressive seatbelt code check that
>> would warn the user if one tried to change to Connected state without
>> hitting first the Closing state:
>>
>> pcifront pci-0: PCI frontend already installed!
>>
>> However, that code can be relaxed and we can continue on working
>> even if the frontend is instructed to be the 'Connected' state with
>> no devices and then gets tickled to be in 'Connected' state again.
>>
>> In other words, this 4(Connected)->5(Closing)->4(Connected) state
>> was expected, while 4(Connected)->.... anything but 5(Closing)->4(Connected)
>> was not. This patch removes that aggressive check and allows
>> Xen pcifront to work with the 'xl' toolstack.
>
> I actually think this shouldn't be worked around here, but fixed in
> xl. Any device removed from a guest should be driven towards
> the "Closed" state.
Yeah, that seems pretty obvious to me. The weird thing is that this
wasn't noticed before -- does this work in 4.2? Have you been doing
this test all along, or has it only broken recently?
I've reproduced it on one of my test boxes; let me see if I can sort it out.
-George
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-11 9:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20130610202456.GA17822@phenom.dumpdata.com>
[not found] ` <1370898399-20968-1-git-send-email-konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
2013-06-10 21:06 ` [PATCH] xen/pci: Deal with toolstack missing an 'XenbusStateClosing' Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-06-11 7:29 ` [Xen-devel] " Jan Beulich
2013-06-11 9:00 ` George Dunlap [this message]
2013-06-11 13:03 ` konrad wilk
2013-06-11 15:36 ` George Dunlap
2013-06-11 16:08 ` konrad wilk
2013-06-11 16:17 ` George Dunlap
2013-06-11 16:24 ` konrad wilk
2013-06-12 13:45 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-06-12 13:47 ` George Dunlap
2013-06-12 14:27 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-06-12 17:28 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2013-06-14 16:28 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2013-11-04 20:43 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
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=51B6E711.2000001@eu.citrix.com \
--to=george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
--cc=JBeulich@suse.com \
--cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xen.org \
/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).