From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3DC9C433F5 for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2021 06:42:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9061561A78 for ; Sun, 3 Oct 2021 06:42:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229787AbhJCGoV (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Oct 2021 02:44:21 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.133.124]:39349 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229567AbhJCGoU (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Oct 2021 02:44:20 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1633243352; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=r+Bl1u326f9yQhaXb6udjEGQWjjecevglQG5IV4fpCo=; b=dZfMOxllVGBiU9LJpGvXoqspg+dph6U38+PMQLCV1uq9keC8zo46koQIO+nYWOFAcCh9nF +Wwzt7WXOvAhzLEvGhnfJD/HxhRv1ZukZYKFlopSJFK1gC3p+y6zhDUU54CDfio60q4b7Q +YT2YLrxKMXKEcFFtxzsJlxKqKJZtc8= Received: from mail-ed1-f72.google.com (mail-ed1-f72.google.com [209.85.208.72]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-512-Qwh-3f7wN8-U0Zt1BL4uaQ-1; Sun, 03 Oct 2021 02:42:31 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Qwh-3f7wN8-U0Zt1BL4uaQ-1 Received: by mail-ed1-f72.google.com with SMTP id w8-20020a50c448000000b003dae8d38037so1064298edf.8 for ; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 23:42:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=r+Bl1u326f9yQhaXb6udjEGQWjjecevglQG5IV4fpCo=; b=oIztedLMeaW7yrVLmKNl5wSSvhR/u+Y4LoHlKIJ/VwWdlTsDkMAuYtr5Av9w8P7b7s s3Bu9eZNAhYwlSh39pcBVp/2LrefOF0hzZ/ztQFNd+7awo6hh7rCrymbvsEpQn1yFJ6H dcF+IFdJbY1TOLUWpjO9SfLS6DqVTU+WRBcJqTHS4kKpBUJNqajFG4PgJV/HMPGk/Fx0 PqQqa3nq7oyMMgsWsxlbZ24b2mmMQm75QlJYd1ebQVL55A25Z2eNDXeJZItTTrOK24F3 fXUApOGHFHeF1dsyvliJhkIxK+JffbxVNa9dhUlVcKv3Q5RC0vs2Pfj1Q6950icVAvZb S8jQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ljMtTWSQRgL/HUCVwspaZa0Hibi9u6VIYJSczpEYEfvdeOEzO H8YF9EMEBunSUem+MGs6d2Di2WqA1Ok9wRsq+RbOZBqwc41Ehy0s56UHfaoSo1yN4iV6nl0w4P2 rIPiFoVh8GhqjdEpQLaNTxQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2d0d:: with SMTP id gs13mr8578180ejc.94.1633243350450; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 23:42:30 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxtHT8Cegow6Zx3CCdmEJQH1USoUtFEpuumSAmNgt5hz1mJRyfrkZWULFFV8XgcH+xyZ4AWZQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:2d0d:: with SMTP id gs13mr8578148ejc.94.1633243350156; Sat, 02 Oct 2021 23:42:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com ([2.55.22.213]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h10sm5564701edf.85.2021.10.02.23.42.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 02 Oct 2021 23:42:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 3 Oct 2021 02:42:25 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Halil Pasic Cc: Cornelia Huck , Jason Wang , Xie Yongji , virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, markver@us.ibm.com, Christian Borntraeger , linux-s390@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] virtio: write back features before verify Message-ID: <20211003021027-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20210930012049.3780865-1-pasic@linux.ibm.com> <20210930070444-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <87fstm47no.fsf@redhat.com> <20211002141351-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20211003070030.658fc94e.pasic@linux.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20211003070030.658fc94e.pasic@linux.ibm.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Oct 03, 2021 at 07:00:30AM +0200, Halil Pasic wrote: > On Sat, 2 Oct 2021 14:20:47 -0400 > "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > > > > >From my perspective the problem is that the version of the device > > > remains in limbo as long as the features have not yet been finalized, > > > which means that the endianness of the config space remains in limbo as > > > well. Both device and driver might come to different conclusions. > > > > Version === legacy versus modern? > > It is true that feature negotiation can not be used by device to decide that > > question simply because it happens too late. > > So let's not use it for that then ;) > > > > Yes we have VERSION_1 which looks like it should allow this, but > > unfortunately it only helps with that for the driver, not the device. > > > > In practice legacy versus modern has to be determined by > > transport specific versioning, luckily we have that for all > > specified transports (can't say what happens with rproc). > > So if we look at ccw, you say that the revision negotiation already > determines whether VERSION_1 is negotiated or not, and the > feature bit VERSION_1 is superfluous? > > That would also imply, that > 1) if revision > 0 was negotiated then the device must offer VERSION_1 > 2) if revision > 0 was negotiated and the driver cleared VERSION_1 > the device must refuse to operate. > 3) if revision > 0 was negotiated then the driver should reject > to drive a device if it does not offer VERSION_1 > 4) if revision > 0 was negotiated the driver must accept VERSION_1 > 5) if revision > 0 was *not* negotiated then the device should not offer > VERSION_1 because at this point it is already certain that the device > can not act in accordance to the virtio 1.0 or higher interface. > > Does that sound about right? To me, it does. > IMHO we should also change > https://docs.oasis-open.org/virtio/virtio/v1.1/cs01/virtio-v1.1-cs01.html#x1-160003 > and the definition of VERSION_1 because both sides have to know what is > going on before features are fully negotiated. Or? > > Regards, > Halil > I guess so. And I guess we need transport-specific sections describing this behaviour for each transport. So something like this, for starters? diff --git a/content.tex b/content.tex index 1398390..c526dd3 100644 --- a/content.tex +++ b/content.tex @@ -140,10 +140,13 @@ \subsection{Legacy Interface: A Note on Feature Bits}\label{sec:Basic Facilities of a Virtio Device / Feature Bits / Legacy Interface: A Note on Feature Bits} -Transitional Drivers MUST detect Legacy Devices by detecting that -the feature bit VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 is not offered. -Transitional devices MUST detect Legacy drivers by detecting that -VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 has not been acknowledged by the driver. +Transitional drivers MAY support operating legacy devices. +Transitional devices MAY support operation by legacy drivers. + +Transitional drivers MUST detect legacy devices in a way that is +transport specific. +Transitional devices MUST detect legacy drivers in a way that +is transport specific. In this case device is used through the legacy interface. @@ -160,6 +163,25 @@ \subsection{Legacy Interface: A Note on Feature Specification text within these sections generally does not apply to non-transitional devices. +\begin{note} +The device offers different features when used through +the legacy interface and when operated in accordance with this +specification. +\end{note} + +Transitional drivers MUST use Devices only through the legacy interface +if the feature bit VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 is not offered. +Transitional devices MUST NOT offer VIRTIO_F_VERSION_1 when used through +the legacy interface. + +When the driver uses a device through the legacy interface, then it +MUST only accept the features the device offered through the +legacy interface. + +When used through the legacy interface, the device SHOULD +validate that the driver only accepted the features it +offered through the legacy interface. + \section{Notifications}\label{sec:Basic Facilities of a Virtio Device / Notifications}