[PATCH] virtio_console: avoid config access from irq

[PATCH] virtio_console: avoid config access from irq

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

when multiport is off, virtio console invokes config access from irq
context, config access is blocking on s390.
Fix this up by scheduling work from config irq - similar to what we do
for multiport configs.

Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
---

Applies on top of "virtio_console: init work unconditionally"
that I sent previously.

 drivers/char/virtio_console.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/char/virtio_console.c b/drivers/char/virtio_console.c
index def736d..72d7028 100644
--- a/drivers/char/virtio_console.c
+++ b/drivers/char/virtio_console.c
@@ -142,6 +142,7 @@ struct ports_device {
 	 * notification
 	 */
 	struct work_struct control_work;
+	struct work_struct config_work;
 
 	struct list_head ports;
 
@@ -1837,10 +1838,21 @@ static void config_intr(struct virtio_device *vdev)
 
 	portdev = vdev->priv;
 
+	if (!use_multiport(portdev))
+		schedule_work(&portdev->config_work);
+}
+
+static void config_work_handler(struct work_struct *work)
+{
+	struct ports_device *portdev;
+
+	portdev = container_of(work, struct ports_device, control_work);
 	if (!use_multiport(portdev)) {
+		struct virtio_device *vdev;
 		struct port *port;
 		u16 rows, cols;
 
+		vdev = portdev->vdev;
 		virtio_cread(vdev, struct virtio_console_config, cols, &cols);
 		virtio_cread(vdev, struct virtio_console_config, rows, &rows);
 
@@ -2040,6 +2052,7 @@ static int virtcons_probe(struct virtio_device *vdev)
 
 	virtio_device_ready(portdev->vdev);
 
+	INIT_WORK(&portdev->config_work, &config_work_handler);
 	INIT_WORK(&portdev->control_work, &control_work_handler);
 
 	if (multiport) {
@@ -2114,6 +2127,8 @@ static void virtcons_remove(struct virtio_device *vdev)
 	/* Finish up work that's lined up */
 	if (use_multiport(portdev))
 		cancel_work_sync(&portdev->control_work);
+	else
+		cancel_work_sync(&portdev->config_work);
 
 	list_for_each_entry_safe(port, port2, &portdev->ports, list)
 		unplug_port(port);
@@ -2165,6 +2180,7 @@ static int virtcons_freeze(struct virtio_device *vdev)
 
 	virtqueue_disable_cb(portdev->c_ivq);
 	cancel_work_sync(&portdev->control_work);
+	cancel_work_sync(&portdev->config_work);
 	/*
 	 * Once more: if control_work_handler() was running, it would
 	 * enable the cb as the last step.
-- 
MST

Re: [PATCH] virtio_console: avoid config access from irq

[Amit Shah]

On (Sat) 28 Feb 2015 [18:42:25], Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> when multiport is off, virtio console invokes config access from irq
> context, config access is blocking on s390.
> Fix this up by scheduling work from config irq - similar to what we do
> for multiport configs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>

Reviewed-by: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>

		Amit

Re: [PATCH] virtio_console: avoid config access from irq

[Rusty Russell]

Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com> writes:
> On (Sat) 28 Feb 2015 [18:42:25], Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> when multiport is off, virtio console invokes config access from irq
>> context, config access is blocking on s390.
>> Fix this up by scheduling work from config irq - similar to what we do
>> for multiport configs.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>

Applied, thanks.

Should these be CC: stable?

Cheers,
Rusty.

Re: [PATCH] virtio_console: avoid config access from irq

[Michael S. Tsirkin]

On Wed, Mar 04, 2015 at 11:08:18AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote:
> Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com> writes:
> > On (Sat) 28 Feb 2015 [18:42:25], Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> >> when multiport is off, virtio console invokes config access from irq
> >> context, config access is blocking on s390.
> >> Fix this up by scheduling work from config irq - similar to what we do
> >> for multiport configs.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Amit Shah <amit.shah@redhat.com>
> 
> Applied, thanks.
> 
> Should these be CC: stable?
> 
> Cheers,
> Rusty.

Yes, you are right.