Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 0/2] virtio-pci: fix abort when fail to allocate ioeventfd

[Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>]

On 03/14/2012 12:39 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 03/14/2012 11:59 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > On 03/13/2012 12:42 PM, Amos Kong wrote:
> >> >> Boot up guest with 232 virtio-blk disk, qemu will abort for fail to
> >> >> allocate ioeventfd. This patchset changes kvm_has_many_ioeventfds(),
> >> >> and check if available ioeventfd exists. If not, virtio-pci will
> >> >> fallback to userspace, and don't use ioeventfd for io notification.
> >> >
> >> > How about an alternative way of solving this, within the memory core:
> >> > trap those writes in qemu and write to the ioeventfd yourself.  This way
> >> > ioeventfds work even without kvm:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >  core: create eventfd
> >> >  core: install handler for memory address that writes to ioeventfd
> >> >  kvm (optional): install kernel handler for ioeventfd
> >> >
> >> > even if the third step fails, the ioeventfd still works, it's just slower.
> >>
> >> That approach will penalize guests with large numbers of disks - they
> >> see an extra switch to vcpu thread instead of kvm.ko -> iothread.
> >
> > It's only a failure path.  The normal path is expected to have a kvm
> > ioeventfd installed.
>
> It's the normal path when you attach >232 virtio-blk devices to a
> guest (or 300 in the future).

Well, there's nothing we can do about it.

We'll increase the limit of course, but old kernels will remain out
there.  The right fix is virtio-scsi anyway.

> >>   It
> >> seems okay provided we can solve the limit in the kernel once and for
> >> all by introducing a more dynamic data structure for in-kernel
> >> devices.  That way future kernels will never hit an arbitrary limit
> >> below their file descriptor rlimit.
> >>
> >> Is there some reason why kvm.ko must use a fixed size array?  Would it
> >> be possible to use a tree (maybe with a cache for recent lookups)?
> >
> > It does use bsearch today IIRC.  We'll expand the limit, but there must
> > be a limit, and qemu must be prepared to deal with it.
>
> Shouldn't the limit be the file descriptor rlimit?  If userspace
> cannot create more eventfds then it cannot set up more ioeventfds.

You can use the same eventfd for multiple ioeventfds.  If you mean to
slave kvm's ioeventfd limit to the number of files the process can have,
that's a good idea.  Surely an ioeventfd occupies less resources than an
open file.

-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function