From: Igor Mammedov <imammedo@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Libvirt Mailing List <libvir-list@redhat.com>,
David Gibson <dgibson@redhat.com>,
Julia Suvorova <jusual@redhat.com>,
qemu devel list <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pci: Refuse to hotplug PCI Devices when the Guest OS is not ready
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2020 19:27:55 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201023192755.1845b060@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201023115029-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 11:54:40 -0400
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 09:47:14AM +0300, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote:
> > Hi David,
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 6:49 AM David Gibson <dgibson@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 11:01:04 -0400
> > "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 05:50:51PM +0300, Marcel Apfelbaum wrote:
> > > [...]ÂÂ
> > >
> > > Right. After detecting just failing unconditionally it a bit too
> > > simplistic IMHO.
> >
> > There's also another factor here, which I thought I'd mentioned
> > already, but looks like I didn't: I think we're still missing some
> > details in what's going on.
> >
> > The premise for this patch is that plugging while the indicator is in
> > transition state is allowed to fail in any way on the guest side. I
> > don't think that's a reasonable interpretation, because it's unworkable
> > for physical hotplug. If the indicator starts blinking while you're in
> > the middle of shoving a card in, you'd be in trouble.
> >
> > So, what I'm assuming here is that while "don't plug while blinking" is
> > the instruction for the operator to obey as best they can, on the guest
> > side the rule has to be "start blinking, wait a while and by the time
> > you leave blinking state again, you can be confident any plugs or
> > unplugs have completed". Obviously still racy in the strict computer
> > science sense, but about the best you can do with slow humans in the
> > mix.
> >
> > So, qemu should of course endeavour to follow that rule as though it
> > was a human operator on a physical machine and not plug when the
> > indicator is blinking. *But* the qemu plug will in practice be fast
> > enough that if we're hitting real problems here, it suggests the guest
> > is still doing something wrong.
> >
> >
> > I personally think there is a little bit of over-engineering here.
> > Let's start with the spec:
> >
> >   Power Indicator Blinking
> >   A blinking Power Indicator indicates that the slot is powering up or
> > powering down and that
> >   insertion or removal of the adapter is not permitted.
> >
> > What exactly is an interpretation here?
> > As you stated, the races are theoretical, the whole point of the indicator
> > is to let the operator know he can't plug the device just yet.
> >
> > I understand it would be more user friendly if the QEMU would wait internally
> > for the
> > blinking to end, but the whole point of the indicator is to let the operatorÂÂ
> > (human or machine)
> > know they can't plug the device at a specific time.
> > Should QEMU take the responsibility of the operator? Is it even correct?
> >
> > Even if we would want such a feature, how is it related to this patch?
> > The patch simply refuses to start a hotplug operation when it knows it will not
> > succeed.ÂÂ
> > ÂÂ
> > Another way that would make sense to me would be is a new QEMU interface other
> > than
> > "add_device", let's say "adding_device_allowed", that would return true if the
> > hotplug is allowed
> > at this point of time. (I am aware of the theoretical races)ÂÂ
>
> Rather than adding_device_allowed, something like "query slot"
> might be helpful for debugging. That would help user figure out
> e.g. why isn't device visible without any races.
Would be new command useful tough? What we end up is broken guest
(if I read commit message right) and a user who has no idea if
device_add was successful or not.
So what user should do in this case
- wait till it explodes?
- can user remove it or it would be stuck there forever?
- poll slot before hotplug, manually?
(if this is the case then failing device_add cleanly doesn't sound bad,
it looks similar to another error we have "/* Check if hot-plug is disabled on the slot */"
in pcie_cap_slot_pre_plug_cb)
CCing libvirt, as it concerns not only QEMU.
>
> > The above will at least mimic the mechanics of the pyhs world. The operator
> > looks at the indicator,
> > the management software checks if adding the device is allowed.
> > Since it is a corner case I would prefer the device_add to fail rather than
> > introducing a new interface,
> > but that's just me.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Marcel
> >
>
> I think we want QEMU management interface to be reasonably
> abstract and agnostic if possible. Pushing knowledge of hardware
> detail to management will just lead to pain IMHO.
> We supported device_add which practically never fails for years,
For CPUs and RAM, device_add can fail so maybe management is also
prepared to handle errors on PCI hotplug path.
> at this point it's easier to keep supporting it than
> change all users ...
>
>
> >
> > --
> > David Gibson <dgibson@redhat.com>
> > Principal Software Engineer, Virtualization, Red Hat
> >
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-23 17:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-10-22 11:40 [PATCH] pci: Refuse to hotplug PCI Devices when the Guest OS is not ready Marcel Apfelbaum
2020-10-22 12:06 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-22 12:56 ` David Gibson
2020-10-22 13:15 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-23 3:30 ` David Gibson
2020-10-22 13:55 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2020-10-22 14:01 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-22 14:10 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2020-10-22 14:32 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-22 14:50 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2020-10-22 15:01 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-23 3:49 ` David Gibson
2020-10-23 6:47 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2020-10-23 15:54 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-23 17:27 ` Igor Mammedov [this message]
2020-10-26 6:38 ` David Gibson
2020-10-26 9:17 ` Peter Krempa
2020-10-26 6:35 ` David Gibson
2020-10-23 6:26 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2020-10-26 6:45 ` David Gibson
2020-10-27 11:26 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-27 12:54 ` Igor Mammedov
2020-10-27 13:02 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-28 3:34 ` David Gibson
2020-10-28 3:31 ` David Gibson
2020-10-28 15:39 ` Igor Mammedov
2020-10-28 17:49 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-27 11:30 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-10-23 3:31 ` David Gibson
2020-11-11 12:35 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2020-11-15 16:48 ` Marcel Apfelbaum
2020-11-11 16:09 ` Roman Kagan
2020-11-15 16:43 ` 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=20201023192755.1845b060@redhat.com \
--to=imammedo@redhat.com \
--cc=dgibson@redhat.com \
--cc=jusual@redhat.com \
--cc=libvir-list@redhat.com \
--cc=mst@redhat.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@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).