From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (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 3B83E19994F for ; Fri, 4 Apr 2025 08:37:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743755866; cv=none; b=hFXJnAGcaXpniVtclD8v0INQnQsoqDg8XY6qGQR1sbRuMYIhgdZMPBHuxfsVOIedAOxRqXc+jot+eQhfl++HyrT3JXOT79t7HgUAf48zJ52K4C7NvwzO0Wd79kjwV0yFXsqz4q+0cda4A6FyjYaAU4deb4PcHbjYc5454XhGZWM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743755866; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QAhyu4E7HQ19zzaz86rUGI9nPrmZDX3iMt2qJViTveA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=KXrqctbXOqDJr1wEeO7o3K8CedISjcP8QypVY3jwMo6TapBYqIDFpuSLJ4iGpYifs1IOx3lKNx9Rv/4/AeP4DkgUXA0evqBbqmUhOt1OR0qwcW/Dm4yNUsCMl4mxGCiU6ux3qRsJYu+UdsiSYd9xkQLwYgFnAgBWpo4roPr1JCQ= 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=McSve8l1; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 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="McSve8l1" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1743755863; 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=OI1Zt3NFcFi/P6TNraRk0oZkTYZ+LV6TSig6Xx970e4=; b=McSve8l1yAtjAIJGkbT24GjnRJmi/TAnGmIC45h82EM7zuGHzwa2EM3+CvZ84RKxCLfydX /7zg7w7M+KUPLqEn/cN5WTPGEes5tQX3n9I0Q+O6vyFlxJJEzwcUWL7Kp4sHMKrevD23Js 4E9iHYD0O0ek6pMIYC+71OglSxIkK5A= Received: from mail-wr1-f72.google.com (mail-wr1-f72.google.com [209.85.221.72]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-262-Qxd6mnnmPTeZKY8-B9ADKw-1; Fri, 04 Apr 2025 04:37:41 -0400 X-MC-Unique: Qxd6mnnmPTeZKY8-B9ADKw-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: Qxd6mnnmPTeZKY8-B9ADKw_1743755861 Received: by mail-wr1-f72.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39c30f26e31so1137657f8f.3 for ; Fri, 04 Apr 2025 01:37:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1743755860; x=1744360660; 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=OI1Zt3NFcFi/P6TNraRk0oZkTYZ+LV6TSig6Xx970e4=; b=XBMioMgYiggEdC27mjYPZydz8A2qXPR2DKLXvZsMv5NytWVqqYZNEuqHcuHsZyRWRF Jnqm+LmlpmKKDlj69eo7/rbzmxST8dB5OzINeY1Rto1UDqVBhhup9LV34j5qi4TC0KwU IuTVqPuLSEpHwuYus22dA/6NVqtVaZ5iZZO0P5H8+DrMQigTSSu3JCx3XbtY4wEdNdsz boD8BNku4HkfCdPoOD/M4g7Pya5f4kEnXmnhcvk8EZXbDp2lNYweHNitnWl0vdS0BAR+ SYMuDvhZXJO77fnx/J6gKNcx5LIla6d7K4an1K5g4iZmA/C0FU7grkb4sBKWGKwvTgyS EYqw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVj8PVvoWkuZldxaYV/Fh6daMmRjUKMnpjrFJ92bHdrW+AVRqy0I4btjCR73Qbt2l+EZuCQwGQ=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwmVjshgZO5iGIU6e5E4LS8rSLZKH6lGqpeq0zASxwrkxuzuXjN hZKz7PO2Vm6Ml8rgkVUXo6Php8s7N9LJTikyQA9etF4yMUu99Ic8xBKlrff4jY060PIvjEydSRe vJSVY30Z5SFYK5CxTJOvGneRjd24GygLaCjnaCACNAHEvF0PDGXRvig== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctNxjVn826z/DoRXU7vYVbvajcZos9BlXh9hG4zJ8PTP5YpyxALQOELYPDvNCT 3mz9fjsHoILpgXhiT/KqC4zI2lJY5uqfUi4PwuPQ3qZx0BXDuJTL3siwus1wM5FlAFBffJAw2ik UyNRQMH8ymZoQb64c0iH2Mq8NDbCsic3LIUvQ9D8QvnelZNcpjDyw3LiEQ6VtW3k8ZxDouP6mkt 8q4DR6s49ysDmKFSf41bkjhfefENE4hkxRd8b6Er1gyI70ZhyW18dMdGTvN99zpk42LW9S9q4k1 WHOwrhc0Kw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:430c:b0:391:2e31:c7e5 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39cb36b2ab2mr2013770f8f.6.1743755860545; Fri, 04 Apr 2025 01:37:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEeh87271OU/aKTaskLblwGps7bO+cJZTClXWXzF8apC0wBecu3MvRM0wP/QWFDltqL8vhYdA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:430c:b0:391:2e31:c7e5 with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-39cb36b2ab2mr2013743f8f.6.1743755860159; Fri, 04 Apr 2025 01:37:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from redhat.com ([2a0d:6fc0:1517:1000:ea83:8e5f:3302:3575]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ffacd0b85a97d-39c301a7225sm3768866f8f.26.2025.04.04.01.37.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 04 Apr 2025 01:37:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 4 Apr 2025 04:37:36 -0400 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" To: Stefano Garzarella Cc: Alexander Graf , Stefan Hajnoczi , netdev@vger.kernel.org, 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: <20250404043326-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> <20250404041050-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> 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: On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 10:30:43AM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > On Fri, Apr 04, 2025 at 04:14:51AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > 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. > > I didn't fully understand either, but with this last message of yours it's > clear to me and I like the idea! > > > > > 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. > > One case I see is responding when we don't have the socket listening (e.g. > the port is not open), so if before the user had a message that the port was > not open, now instead connect() will timeout. So we could respond if we have > space in the virtqueue, otherwise discard it without losing any important > information or guarantee of a lossless channel. > > So in summary: > > - if we have an associated socket, then always respond (possibly > allocating memory in the intermediate queue if the virtqueue is full > as we already do). We need to figure out if a flood of > VIRTIO_VSOCK_OP_CREDIT_REQUEST would cause problems, but we can always > decide not to respond if we have sent this identical information > before. If taking this path, need to consider not responding is within spec or not. But again, credit update needed is just a single flag we need to set on a socket. If we have anything we need to send, it can also update the credits. > - if there is no associated socket, we only respond if virtqueue has > space. > > I like it and it seems feasible without changing anything in the > specification. > > Did I get it right? > > Thanks, > Stefano That was the idea, yes. -- MST