From: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: amit@kernel.org, arnd@arndb.de, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org,
virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, jasowang@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xiaohli@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] virtio_console: free unused buffers with port delete
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 01:36:48 -0400 (EDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <361928616.7829318.1565588208467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190810141019-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
>
> On Fri, Aug 09, 2019 at 12:18:46PM +0530, Pankaj Gupta wrote:
> > The commit a7a69ec0d8e4 ("virtio_console: free buffers after reset")
> > deferred detaching of unused buffer to virtio device unplug time.
> > This causes unplug/replug of single port in virtio device with an
> > error "Error allocating inbufs\n". As we don't free the unused buffers
> > attached with the port. Re-plug the same port tries to allocate new
> > buffers in virtqueue and results in this error if queue is full.
>
> So why not reuse the buffers that are already there in this case?
> Seems quite possible.
I took this approach because reusing the buffers will involve tweaking
the existing core functionality like managing the the virt queue indexes.
Compared to that deleting the buffers while hot-unplugging port is simple
and was working fine before. It seems logically correct as well.
I agree we need a spec change for this.
>
> > This patch removes the unused buffers in vq's when we unplug the port.
> > This is the best we can do as we cannot call device_reset because virtio
> > device is still active.
> >
> > Reported-by: Xiaohui Li <xiaohli@redhat.com>
> > Fixes: a7a69ec0d8e4 ("virtio_console: free buffers after reset")
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Pankaj Gupta <pagupta@redhat.com>
>
> This is really a revert of a7a69ec0d8e4, just tagged confusingly.
>
> And the original is also supposed to be a bugfix.
> So how will the original bug be fixed?
Yes, Even I was confused while adding this tag.
I will remove remove 'fixes' tag completely for this patch?
because its a revert to original behavior which also is a bugfix.
>
> "this is the best we can do" is rarely the case.
>
> I am not necessarily against the revert. But if we go that way then what
> we need to do is specify the behaviour in the spec, since strict spec
> compliance is exactly what the original patch was addressing.
Agree.
>
> In particular, we'd document that console has a special property that
> when port is detached virtqueue is considered stopped, device must not
> use any buffers, and it is legal to take buffers out of the device.
Yes. This documents the exact scenario. Thanks.
You want me to send a patch for the spec change?
Best regards,
Pankaj
>
>
>
> > ---
> > drivers/char/virtio_console.c | 14 +++++++++++---
> > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/char/virtio_console.c b/drivers/char/virtio_console.c
> > index 7270e7b69262..e8be82f1bae9 100644
> > --- a/drivers/char/virtio_console.c
> > +++ b/drivers/char/virtio_console.c
> > @@ -1494,15 +1494,25 @@ static void remove_port(struct kref *kref)
> > kfree(port);
> > }
> >
> > +static void remove_unused_bufs(struct virtqueue *vq)
> > +{
> > + struct port_buffer *buf;
> > +
> > + while ((buf = virtqueue_detach_unused_buf(vq)))
> > + free_buf(buf, true);
> > +}
> > +
> > static void remove_port_data(struct port *port)
> > {
> > spin_lock_irq(&port->inbuf_lock);
> > /* Remove unused data this port might have received. */
> > discard_port_data(port);
> > + remove_unused_bufs(port->in_vq);
> > spin_unlock_irq(&port->inbuf_lock);
> >
> > spin_lock_irq(&port->outvq_lock);
> > reclaim_consumed_buffers(port);
> > + remove_unused_bufs(port->out_vq);
> > spin_unlock_irq(&port->outvq_lock);
> > }
> >
> > @@ -1938,11 +1948,9 @@ static void remove_vqs(struct ports_device *portdev)
> > struct virtqueue *vq;
> >
> > virtio_device_for_each_vq(portdev->vdev, vq) {
> > - struct port_buffer *buf;
> >
> > flush_bufs(vq, true);
> > - while ((buf = virtqueue_detach_unused_buf(vq)))
> > - free_buf(buf, true);
> > + remove_unused_bufs(vq);
> > }
> > portdev->vdev->config->del_vqs(portdev->vdev);
> > kfree(portdev->in_vqs);
> > --
> > 2.21.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-12 5:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-09 6:48 [PATCH v3 0/2] virtio_console: fix replug of virtio console port Pankaj Gupta
2019-08-09 6:48 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] virtio_console: free unused buffers with port delete Pankaj Gupta
2019-08-10 18:18 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-08-12 5:36 ` Pankaj Gupta [this message]
2019-08-12 9:18 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-08-09 6:48 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] virtio: decrement avail idx with buffer detach for packed ring Pankaj Gupta
2019-08-10 18:12 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2019-08-12 5:05 ` Pankaj Gupta
2019-08-12 4:46 ` Jason Wang
2019-08-12 5:37 ` Pankaj Gupta
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=361928616.7829318.1565588208467.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com \
--to=pagupta@redhat.com \
--cc=amit@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=xiaohli@redhat.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