Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] vhost-scsi: Fix IO hangs when using windows

Stefan Hajnoczi
2023-07-13T14:04:55Z

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3370 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 12, 2023 at 11:05:11AM -0500, Mike Christie wrote:
> On 7/12/23 9:26 AM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 04:01:22PM -0500, Mike Christie wrote:
> >> On 7/11/23 1:34 PM, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote:
> >>> On Sun, Jul 09, 2023 at 03:28:57PM -0500, Mike Christie wrote:
> >>>> The following patches were made over Linus's tree and fix an issue
> >>>> where windows guests will send iovecs with offset/lengths that result
> >>>> in IOs that are not aligned to 512. The LIO layer will then send them
> >>>> to Linux's FS/block layer but it requires 512 byte alignment, so
> >>>> depending on the FS/block driver being used we will get IO errors or
> >>>> hung IO.
> >>>>
> >>>> The following patches have vhost-scsi detect when windows sends these
> >>>> IOs and copy them to a bounce buffer. It then does some cleanup in
> >>>> the related code.
> >>>
> >>> Hang on, virtio-scsi is a SCSI HBA and READs/WRITEs submitted must
> >>> follow the usual constraints on SCSI block limits. Would Windows send
> >>> mis-aligned I/O to a non-virtio-scsi SCSI HBA?
> >>
> >> It's like linux where you can config settings like that.
> >>
> >>>> Are you sure this is not a bug in the Windows guest driver where block
> >>> limits are being misconfigured?
> >>
> >> From what our windows dev told us the guest drivers like here:
> >>
> >> https://github.com/virtio-win
> >>
> >> don't set the windows AlignmentMask to 512. They tried that and it
> >> resulted in windows crash dump crashing because it doesn't like the
> >> hard alignment requirement.
> >>
> >> We thought other apps would have trouble as well, so we tried to add
> >> bounce buffer support to the windows driver, but I think people thought
> >> it was going to be uglier than this patch and in the normal alignment
> >> case might also affect performance. There was some windows driver/layering
> >> and buffer/cmd details that I don't fully understand and took their word
> >> for because I don't know a lot about windows.
> >>
> >> In the end we still have to add checks to vhost-scsi to protect against
> >> bad drivers, so we thought we might as well just add bounce buffer support
> >> to vhost-scsi.
> >
> > CCing virtio-win developers so they can confirm how the vioscsi driver
> > is supposed to handle request alignment.
> >
> > My expectation is that the virtio-scsi device will fail mis-aligned I/O
> > requests.
>
> I don't think you can just change the driver's behavior to fail now,
> because apps send mis-aligned IO and its working as long as they have less
> than 256 bio vecs.
>
> We see mis-aligned IOs during boot and also from random non window's apps.
> If we just start to fail then it would be a regression when the app no
> longer works or the OS fails to start up.

I was wrong:

The virtio-scsi specification contains no alignment requirements for I/O
buffers. It is fine for the driver to submit iovecs with any memory
alignment.

The QEMU code allocates a bounce buffer if the iovecs submitted by the
driver do not match the minimum alignment requirements on the host (e.g.
O_DIRECT requirements).

It makes sense that vhost_scsi needs to use a bounce buffer in cases
where the underlying storage has stricter memory alignment requirements.

Acked-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@redhat.com>

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]