From: Halil Pasic <pasic@linux.ibm.com>
To: Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com>
Cc: Jason Herne <jjherne@linux.ibm.com>,
Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org,
Jared Rossi <jrossi@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] vfio-ccw: Return IOINST_CC_NOT_OPERATIONAL for EIO
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2020 03:24:28 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200325032428.11dd27a2.pasic@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200324180430.3597ca94.cohuck@redhat.com>
On Tue, 24 Mar 2020 18:04:30 +0100
Cornelia Huck <cohuck@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 22:45:03 +0100
> Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>
> >
> > EIO is returned by vfio-ccw mediated device when the backing
> > host subchannel is not operational anymore. So return cc=3
> > back to the guest, rather than returning a unit check.
> > This way the guest can take appropriate action such as
> > issue an 'stsch'.
I believe this is not the only situation when vfio-ccw returns
EIO, or?
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Farhan Ali <alifm@linux.ibm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Farman <farman@linux.ibm.com>
> > ---
> >
> > Notes:
> > v1->v2: [EF]
> > - Add s-o-b
> > - [Seems the discussion on v1 centered on the return code
> > set in the kernel, rather than anything that needs to
> > change here, unless I've missed something.]
Does this need to change here? If the kernel is supposed to return ENODEV
then this does not need to change.
>
> I've stared at this and at the kernel code for some time again; and I'm
> not sure if "return -EIO == not operational" is even true. That said,
> I'm not sure a unit check is the right response, either. The only thing
> I'm sure about is that the kernel code needs some review of return
> codes and some documentation...
I could not agree more, this is semantically uapi and needs to be
properly documented.
With regards to "linux error codes: vs "ionist cc's" an where
the mapping is different example:
"""
/**
* cio_cancel_halt_clear - Cancel running I/O by performing cancel, halt
* and clear ordinally if subchannel is valid.
* @sch: subchannel on which to perform the cancel_halt_clear operation
* @iretry: the number of the times remained to retry the next operation
*
* This should be called repeatedly since halt/clear are asynchronous
* operations. We do one try with cio_cancel, three tries with cio_halt,
* 255 tries with cio_clear. The caller should initialize @iretry with
* the value 255 for its first call to this, and keep using the same
* @iretry in the subsequent calls until it gets a non -EBUSY return.
*
* Returns 0 if device now idle, -ENODEV for device not operational,
* -EBUSY if an interrupt is expected (either from halt/clear or from a
* status pending), and -EIO if out of retries.
*/
int cio_cancel_halt_clear(struct subchannel *sch, int *iretry)
"""
Here -ENODEV is not operational.
Regards,
Halil
>
> >
> > hw/vfio/ccw.c | 1 +
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/hw/vfio/ccw.c b/hw/vfio/ccw.c
> > index 50cc2ec75c..19144ecfc7 100644
> > --- a/hw/vfio/ccw.c
> > +++ b/hw/vfio/ccw.c
> > @@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ again:
> > return IOINST_CC_BUSY;
> > case -ENODEV:
> > case -EACCES:
> > + case -EIO:
> > return IOINST_CC_NOT_OPERATIONAL;
> > case -EFAULT:
> > default:
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-25 2:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-06 21:45 [RFC PATCH v2 0/7] s390x/vfio_ccw: Channel Path Handling [QEMU] Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] vfio-ccw: Return IOINST_CC_NOT_OPERATIONAL for EIO Eric Farman
2020-03-24 17:04 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-03-25 2:24 ` Halil Pasic [this message]
2020-04-01 8:52 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-04-06 18:21 ` Eric Farman
2020-04-07 6:28 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-04-07 10:18 ` Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 2/7] linux-headers: update Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 3/7] vfio-ccw: Refactor cleanup of regions Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 4/7] vfio-ccw: Add support for the schib region Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 5/7] vfio-ccw: Add support for the crw region Eric Farman
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 6/7] vfio-ccw: Refactor ccw irq handler Eric Farman
2020-03-24 17:32 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-02-06 21:45 ` [RFC PATCH v2 7/7] vfio-ccw: Add support for the CRW irq Eric Farman
2020-04-06 16:22 ` Cornelia Huck
2020-04-06 21:37 ` Eric Farman
2020-04-07 6:35 ` Cornelia Huck
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=20200325032428.11dd27a2.pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--to=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=cohuck@redhat.com \
--cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jjherne@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jrossi@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
/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).