From: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
To: Jaehoon Kim <jhkim@linux.ibm.com>,
qemu-devel@nongnu.org, qemu-s390x@nongnu.org
Cc: farman@linux.ibm.com, pasic@linux.ibm.com,
borntraeger@linux.ibm.com, thuth@redhat.com,
richard.henderson@linaro.org, david@redhat.com,
iii@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] s390x/pci: fix interrupt blocking by returning only the device's summary bit
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 16:00:24 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d439465f-4946-4cd1-90fd-6f6041cf8ba6@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251001154004.71917-1-jhkim@linux.ibm.com>
On 10/1/25 11:39 AM, Jaehoon Kim wrote:
> Previously, set_ind_atomic() returned the entire byte containing
> multiple summary bits. This meant that if any other summary bit in the
> byte was set, interrupt injection could be incorrectly blocked, even
> when the current device's summary bit was not set. As a result, the
> guest could remain blocked after I/O completion during FIO tests.
>
> This patch replaces set_ind_atomic() with set_ind_bit_atomic(), which
> returns true if the bit was set by this function, and false if it was
> already set or mapping failed. Interrupts are now blocked only when
> the device's own summary bit was not previously set, avoiding
> unintended blocking when multiple PCI summary bits exist within the
> same byte.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Kim <jhkim@linux.ibm.com>
Thanks Jaehoon!
To give a little additional background info, this issue was noticed when issuing simultaneous fio jobs across multiple virtio-blk-pci devices on an s390x guest (e.g. not the s390 default virtio-ccw tranpsort nor PCI passthrough).
In doing so, occasional I/O hangs were observed in the guest that were determined to be loss of initiative.
The root cause of this loss of initiative is the erroneous summary bit checking that Jaehoon is fixing here, where a decision might be made to not deliver an adapter interrupt because a different summary bit in the same byte happened to already be on. We really only want to skip the interrupt if the exact same bit was already on.
I have also tested this against an s390x guest virtio-pci+fio setup where I could reliably reproduce the issue and verified that this fix resolves the issue.
Reviewed-by: Matthew Rosato <mjrosato@linux.ibm.com>
> ---
> hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c | 21 +++++++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c
> index f87d2748b6..e8e41c8a9a 100644
> --- a/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c
> +++ b/hw/s390x/s390-pci-bus.c
> @@ -652,7 +652,16 @@ static const PCIIOMMUOps s390_iommu_ops = {
> .get_address_space = s390_pci_dma_iommu,
> };
>
> -static uint8_t set_ind_atomic(uint64_t ind_loc, uint8_t to_be_set)
> +/**
> + * set_ind_bit_atomic - Atomically set a bit in an indicator
> + *
> + * @ind_loc: Address of the indicator
> + * @to_be_set: Bit to set
> + *
> + * Returns true if the bit was set by this function, false if it was
> + * already set or mapping failed.
> + */
> +static bool set_ind_bit_atomic(uint64_t ind_loc, uint8_t to_be_set)
> {
> uint8_t expected, actual;
> hwaddr len = 1;
> @@ -662,7 +671,7 @@ static uint8_t set_ind_atomic(uint64_t ind_loc, uint8_t to_be_set)
> ind_addr = cpu_physical_memory_map(ind_loc, &len, true);
> if (!ind_addr) {
> s390_pci_generate_error_event(ERR_EVENT_AIRERR, 0, 0, 0, 0);
> - return -1;
> + return false;
> }
> actual = *ind_addr;
> do {
> @@ -671,7 +680,7 @@ static uint8_t set_ind_atomic(uint64_t ind_loc, uint8_t to_be_set)
> } while (actual != expected);
> cpu_physical_memory_unmap((void *)ind_addr, len, 1, len);
>
> - return actual;
> + return (actual & to_be_set) ? false : true;
> }
>
> static void s390_msi_ctrl_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t data,
> @@ -693,10 +702,10 @@ static void s390_msi_ctrl_write(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t data,
> ind_bit = pbdev->routes.adapter.ind_offset;
> sum_bit = pbdev->routes.adapter.summary_offset;
>
> - set_ind_atomic(pbdev->routes.adapter.ind_addr + (ind_bit + vec) / 8,
> + set_ind_bit_atomic(pbdev->routes.adapter.ind_addr + (ind_bit + vec) / 8,
> 0x80 >> ((ind_bit + vec) % 8));
> - if (!set_ind_atomic(pbdev->routes.adapter.summary_addr + sum_bit / 8,
> - 0x80 >> (sum_bit % 8))) {
> + if (set_ind_bit_atomic(pbdev->routes.adapter.summary_addr + sum_bit / 8,
> + 0x80 >> (sum_bit % 8))) {
> css_adapter_interrupt(CSS_IO_ADAPTER_PCI, pbdev->isc);
> }
> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-01 20:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-01 15:39 [PATCH v1] s390x/pci: fix interrupt blocking by returning only the device's summary bit Jaehoon Kim
2025-10-01 20:00 ` Matthew Rosato [this message]
2025-10-02 7:54 ` Christian Borntraeger
2025-10-02 13:58 ` Eric Farman
2025-10-08 10:43 ` Halil Pasic
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=d439465f-4946-4cd1-90fd-6f6041cf8ba6@linux.ibm.com \
--to=mjrosato@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=borntraeger@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=david@redhat.com \
--cc=farman@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=iii@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jhkim@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=pasic@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=qemu-devel@nongnu.org \
--cc=qemu-s390x@nongnu.org \
--cc=richard.henderson@linaro.org \
--cc=thuth@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).