Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] vfio-ccw: Prevent quiesce function going into an infinite loop

[Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>]

On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 17:23:14 -0400
Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> The quiesce function calls cio_cancel_halt_clear() and if we
> get an -EBUSY we go into a loop where we:
> 	- wait for any interrupts
> 	- flush all I/O in the workqueue
> 	- retry cio_cancel_halt_clear
> 
> During the period where we are waiting for interrupts or
> flushing all I/O, the channel subsystem could have completed
> a halt/clear action and turned off the corresponding activity
> control bits in the subchannel status word. This means the next
> time we call cio_cancel_halt_clear(), we will again start by
> calling cancel subchannel and so we can be stuck between calling
> cancel and halt forever.
> 
> Rather than calling cio_cancel_halt_clear() immediately after
> waiting, let's try to disable the subchannel. If we succeed in
> disabling the subchannel then we know nothing else can happen
> with the device.
> 
> Suggested-by: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> ChangeLog:
> v2 -> v3
>    - Log an error message when cio_cancel_halt_clear
>      returns EIO and break out of the loop.
>    
>    - Did not include past change log as the other patches
>      of the original series have been queued by Conny.
>      Old series (v2) can be found here:
>      https://marc.info/?l=kvm&m=155475754101769&w=2
> 
>  drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++--------------
>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c
> index 78517aa..66a66ac 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/cio/vfio_ccw_drv.c
> @@ -43,26 +43,30 @@ int vfio_ccw_sch_quiesce(struct subchannel *sch)
>  	if (ret != -EBUSY)
>  		goto out_unlock;
>  
> +	iretry = 255;
>  	do {
> -		iretry = 255;
>  
>  		ret = cio_cancel_halt_clear(sch, &iretry);
> -		while (ret == -EBUSY) {
> -			/*
> -			 * Flush all I/O and wait for
> -			 * cancel/halt/clear completion.
> -			 */
> -			private->completion = &completion;
> -			spin_unlock_irq(sch->lock);
>  
> -			wait_for_completion_timeout(&completion, 3*HZ);
> +		if (ret == -EIO) {
> +			pr_err("vfio_ccw: could not quiesce subchannel 0.%x.%04x!\n",
> +			       sch->schid.ssid, sch->schid.sch_no);

What about using
	dev_err(&sch->dev, "could not quiesce");
instead?

(Can make that change while applying, no need to resend for that.)

> +			break;
> +		}
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Flush all I/O and wait for
> +		 * cancel/halt/clear completion.
> +		 */
> +		private->completion = &completion;
> +		spin_unlock_irq(sch->lock);
>  
> -			private->completion = NULL;
> -			flush_workqueue(vfio_ccw_work_q);
> -			spin_lock_irq(sch->lock);
> -			ret = cio_cancel_halt_clear(sch, &iretry);
> -		};
> +		if (ret == -EBUSY)
> +			wait_for_completion_timeout(&completion, 3*HZ);
>  
> +		private->completion = NULL;
> +		flush_workqueue(vfio_ccw_work_q);
> +		spin_lock_irq(sch->lock);
>  		ret = cio_disable_subchannel(sch);
>  	} while (ret == -EBUSY);
>  out_unlock:

Otherwise, looks good to me. Will queue when I get some ack/r-b.