From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@redhat.com>
To: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>,
Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel@redhat.com>,
"Michael S . Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>,
Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>,
Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] pcie-root-port: let it has higher migrate priority
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2018 19:51:31 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180201195131.GO2457@work-vm> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180201112028.23552-1-peterx@redhat.com>
* Peter Xu (peterx@redhat.com) wrote:
> In the past, we prioritized IOMMU migration so that we have such a
> priority order:
>
> IOMMU > PCI Devices
>
> When migrating a guest with both vIOMMU and pcie-root-port, we'll always
> migrate vIOMMU first, since pcie-root-port will be seen to have the same
> priority of general PCI devices.
>
> That's problematic.
>
> The thing is that PCI bus number information is stored in the root port,
> and that is needed by vIOMMU during post_load(), e.g., to figure out
> context entry for a device. If we don't have correct bus numbers for
> devices, we won't be able to recover device state of the DMAR memory
> regions, and things will be messed up.
>
> So let's boost the PCIe root ports to be even with higher priority:
>
> PCIe Root Port > IOMMU > PCI Devices
>
> A smoke test shows that this patch fixes bug 1538953.
Two questions (partially overlapping with what I replied to Michaels):
a) What happens with multiple IOMMUs?
b) What happens with multiple root ports?
c) How correct is this ordering on different implementations
(e.g. ARM/Power/etc)
Dave
>
> CC: Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@redhat.com>
> CC: Marcel Apfelbaum <marcel@redhat.com>
> CC: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
> CC: Dr. David Alan Gilbert <dgilbert@redhat.com>
> CC: Juan Quintela <quintela@redhat.com>
> CC: Laurent Vivier <lvivier@redhat.com>
> Bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1538953
> Reported-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@redhat.com>
> Signed-off-by: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
> ---
> Marcel & all,
>
> I think it's possible that we need similar thing for other bridge-like
> devices, but I'm not that familiar. Would you help confirm? Thanks,
> ---
> hw/pci-bridge/gen_pcie_root_port.c | 1 +
> include/migration/vmstate.h | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/hw/pci-bridge/gen_pcie_root_port.c b/hw/pci-bridge/gen_pcie_root_port.c
> index 0e2f2e8bf1..e6ff1effd8 100644
> --- a/hw/pci-bridge/gen_pcie_root_port.c
> +++ b/hw/pci-bridge/gen_pcie_root_port.c
> @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ static void gen_rp_realize(DeviceState *dev, Error **errp)
>
> static const VMStateDescription vmstate_rp_dev = {
> .name = "pcie-root-port",
> + .priority = MIG_PRI_PCIE_ROOT_PORT,
> .version_id = 1,
> .minimum_version_id = 1,
> .post_load = pcie_cap_slot_post_load,
> diff --git a/include/migration/vmstate.h b/include/migration/vmstate.h
> index 8c3889433c..491449db9f 100644
> --- a/include/migration/vmstate.h
> +++ b/include/migration/vmstate.h
> @@ -148,6 +148,7 @@ enum VMStateFlags {
> typedef enum {
> MIG_PRI_DEFAULT = 0,
> MIG_PRI_IOMMU, /* Must happen before PCI devices */
> + MIG_PRI_PCIE_ROOT_PORT, /* Must happen before IOMMU */
> MIG_PRI_GICV3_ITS, /* Must happen before PCI devices */
> MIG_PRI_GICV3, /* Must happen before the ITS */
> MIG_PRI_MAX,
> --
> 2.14.3
>
--
Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-01 19:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-01 11:20 [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] pcie-root-port: let it has higher migrate priority Peter Xu
2018-02-01 12:24 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2018-02-01 19:18 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2018-02-01 19:48 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2018-02-01 20:01 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2018-02-01 20:10 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2018-02-02 10:04 ` Peter Xu
2018-02-02 13:25 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2018-02-01 19:38 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert
2018-02-02 10:19 ` Peter Xu
2018-02-01 19:51 ` Dr. David Alan Gilbert [this message]
2018-02-02 9:56 ` Peter Xu
2018-02-02 12:39 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
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=20180201195131.GO2457@work-vm \
--to=dgilbert@redhat.com \
--cc=alex.williamson@redhat.com \
--cc=lvivier@redhat.com \
--cc=marcel@redhat.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=quintela@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).