From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BC736185B48 for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2025 08:14:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743754501; cv=none; b=AonuAn2RU9KLCl3qon4OdUnsAhT7WRlpZ4HLW6dNWd/FvfvXzWqBKsbtIY1K4yACW10vju5u4VPalmveuY4mTpXtUU19R7xaWmmvj++3fMdBh3XX6ggegWMzxevfHEldzxi35eY6yr9K31ikS389p/YkWpdZmCNz46/B0E2YFmQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743754501; c=relaxed/simple; bh=AuER94I0UTEjzFOjOSgVJU84xZwyeesTDx/OyQrBbzQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=WJ9B7FdTYikBO6cChlooRN3n1qZ8QVOdrXq5tQQfmuG7FcTTgb7VNrqnq/6+bN7xpJFSsD+kwcPOxTbGry65Vf4178KJm1iCy/WnWXsfQ8mSo3sWJxMEJR6jJ/Zmv4tiVtMecjpEaQnZ/YVv0WtyUQRaIwXwa3ol41uki145jU4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=FaM1gGBA; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="FaM1gGBA" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1743754498; 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=kQ6LXxwBQfr8ph0usRujiqrcsoU2uzBJal5na1Y3wac=; b=FaM1gGBAxiGt8PI+uuQs3rxUSSQjthJJoYVxpcTlGcpmnSXchY2vQEvoTASc5po4r6vu5t 8KVZQo8EauYx3OxwXhrZYNqdX92lIQHGH8vSETC25qNmeAI9M8RBeYobwxpKXyGwIaAOC8 wXyT4pKH1IHutB+1So98nqcHfDEJw+I= Received: from mail-wr1-f69.google.com (mail-wr1-f69.google.com [209.85.221.69]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-491-1Ed5TwbbOtC7z4hjWta0uA-1; Fri, 04 Apr 2025 04:14:57 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 1Ed5TwbbOtC7z4hjWta0uA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: 1Ed5TwbbOtC7z4hjWta0uA_1743754496 Received: by mail-wr1-f69.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39ac9b0cb6aso1260648f8f.2 for ; Fri, 04 Apr 2025 01:14:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1743754496; x=1744359296; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=kQ6LXxwBQfr8ph0usRujiqrcsoU2uzBJal5na1Y3wac=; b=RHTXAGMLbEi4ZtQYXyhLFCeadgNadrF0PbWojuTF3436mphhAnyRdUTJKjaW9SNKy1 lf/SUYSb/Nifanjh/WvTLY/UTxp1gzZ35dEDwhgsJnGmPg255kVbrPDgJ4aBAIyoYGCe ieMO3lZyXtntt4S2jmJAH2WD1AYeh5MTJdbG1qQlolp8qSWxjEBqumsFYlHyPTfiCcxX yckmP9XkTifd4d+x17MPji1n3aBlIT/w3RjyjwqIo8KyXBnOSoVskI9c9ad3ZJeLsvCY u/14sZTsVk5EfSKk67GtqYGM7uoPo04YJ5xbOcNOJoLRuBhn70uqlnScnPXVSsTZVzfg 3pkA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUiES84uStnwOvBp275HxAR4dEE9/Hp5gUNwdL0Y+Ty9fA8luw9Z9eiYq8hgYTr74C/VYGOun0=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwISF7ZUggBze4UbxxkQHhdANrka/qkgOSiM0VZekT6eH0gBDup VPWXh9V35WK4YrQ9uFQtbyoYW0t6JKYmmd84Y2n3T6O5+Qav816VxSOzVIA1Z+iCfmMB/NQLWuJ GNHtldgKAUQJq3SBOJGVWiui1JqTB47/ilkMDM/0Cmbc6n8HlTgx8HYYR8desQA== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctWJ/mmbzgx6jjEC8s55+10AwCSTslG4fU3+W8F6j3tdKRlx8FQSUpgrNi5SW4 zmSRJdlOwbzm811L6B8VqaKcrtGyookrXD3VMDVWQBRJU9ASQgdMXGQBiZHw6BaYnKdZHr22Xcv vAQptGNLmJn27qqOrzYqGMCDqVB2KuFXEyiIRMs2/JYuLIOnbo2eHBQmq9HA/vkyQ3AxKcMTpQd 5qsA1ANqUE6kW10htOTw5iVvkbW62xn3iwHtiRLUuqehIStfaBoYex/yKJThMW2858B+OK5HTvK 3HVrnjHF9w== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5d13:0:b0:38d:eb33:79c2 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39cb35aed51mr1485118f8f.32.1743754495859; Fri, 04 Apr 2025 01:14:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF+Vj4KGL4IGFJsWlV8HmZkBJfzGwgl/hz7tDn67gaKw13cLzScEH8EztFdEVpDbeUUKsnsgA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5d13:0:b0:38d:eb33:79c2 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39cb35aed51mr1485105f8f.32.1743754495425; Fri, 04 Apr 2025 01:14:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com ([2a0d:6fc0:1517:1000:ea83:8e5f:3302:3575]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-39c3020dacfsm3754344f8f.72.2025.04.04.01.14.53 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 04 Apr 2025 01:14:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 04:14:51 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Alexander Graf Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Stefano Garzarella , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux.dev, kvm@vger.kernel.org, Asias He , Paolo Abeni , Jakub Kicinski , Eric Dumazet , "David S . Miller" , nh-open-source@amazon.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vsock/virtio: Remove queued_replies pushback logic Message-ID: <20250404041050-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> References: <20250401201349.23867-1-graf@amazon.com> <20250402161424.GA305204@fedora> <20250403073111-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <32ca5221-5b25-4bfd-acd7-9eebae8c3635@amazon.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <32ca5221-5b25-4bfd-acd7-9eebae8c3635@amazon.com> On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 10:04:38AM +0200, Alexander Graf wrote: > > On 03.04.25 14:21, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 12:14:24PM -0400, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 08:13:49PM +0000, Alexander Graf wrote: > > > > Ever since the introduction of the virtio vsock driver, it included > > > > pushback logic that blocks it from taking any new RX packets until the > > > > TX queue backlog becomes shallower than the virtqueue size. > > > > > > > > This logic works fine when you connect a user space application on the > > > > hypervisor with a virtio-vsock target, because the guest will stop > > > > receiving data until the host pulled all outstanding data from the VM. > > > > > > > > With Nitro Enclaves however, we connect 2 VMs directly via vsock: > > > > > > > > Parent Enclave > > > > > > > > RX -------- TX > > > > TX -------- RX > > > > > > > > This means we now have 2 virtio-vsock backends that both have the pushback > > > > logic. If the parent's TX queue runs full at the same time as the > > > > Enclave's, both virtio-vsock drivers fall into the pushback path and > > > > no longer accept RX traffic. However, that RX traffic is TX traffic on > > > > the other side which blocks that driver from making any forward > > > > progress. We're now in a deadlock. > > > > > > > > To resolve this, let's remove that pushback logic altogether and rely on > > > > higher levels (like credits) to ensure we do not consume unbounded > > > > memory. > > > The reason for queued_replies is that rx packet processing may emit tx > > > packets. Therefore tx virtqueue space is required in order to process > > > the rx virtqueue. > > > > > > queued_replies puts a bound on the amount of tx packets that can be > > > queued in memory so the other side cannot consume unlimited memory. Once > > > that bound has been reached, rx processing stops until the other side > > > frees up tx virtqueue space. > > > > > > It's been a while since I looked at this problem, so I don't have a > > > solution ready. In fact, last time I thought about it I wondered if the > > > design of virtio-vsock fundamentally suffers from deadlocks. > > > > > > I don't think removing queued_replies is possible without a replacement > > > for the bounded memory and virtqueue exhaustion issue though. Credits > > > are not a solution - they are about socket buffer space, not about > > > virtqueue space, which includes control packets that are not accounted > > > by socket buffer space. > > > > Hmm. > > Actually, let's think which packets require a response. > > > > VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_REQUEST > > VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_SHUTDOWN > > VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_CREDIT_REQUEST > > > > > > the response to these always reports a state of an existing socket. > > and, only one type of response is relevant for each socket. > > > > So here's my suggestion: > > stop queueing replies on the vsock device, instead, > > simply store the response on the socket, and create a list of sockets > > that have replies to be transmitted > > > > > > WDYT? > > > Wouldn't that create the same problem again? The socket will eventually push > back any new data that it can take because its FIFO is full. At that point, > the "other side" could still have a queue full of requests on exactly that > socket that need to get processed. We can now not pull those packets off the > virtio queue, because we can not enqueue responses. Either I don't understand what you wrote or I did not explain myself clearly. In this idea there needs to be a single response enqueued like this in the socket, because, no more than one ever needs to be outstanding per socket. For example, until VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_REQUEST is responded to, the socket is not active and does not need to send anything. > > But that means now the one queue is blocked from making forward progress, > because we are applying back pressure. And that means everything can grind > to a halt and we have the same deadlock this patch is trying to fix. > > I don't see how we can possibly guarantee a lossless data channel over a > tiny wire (single, fixed size, in order virtio ring) while also guaranteeing > bounded memory usage. One of the constraints need to go: Either we are no > longer lossless or we effectively allow unbounded memory usage. > > > Alex