Linux virtualization list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
To: Si-Wei Liu <si-wei.liu@oracle.com>
Cc: Eugenio Perez Martin <eperezma@redhat.com>,
	yangjiale <yangjiale133@163.com>,
	Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
	Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>,
	virtualization@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Andrew.Boyer@amd.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] VIRTIO: Update the desc 'flag' fied last in packed ring.
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2026 13:43:18 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260605134252-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6035a8f3-e225-45b0-9f48-55de953bff15@oracle.com>

On Fri, Jun 05, 2026 at 09:03:36AM -0700, Si-Wei Liu wrote:
> 
> 
> On 6/1/2026 11:04 PM, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 2, 2026 at 6:34 AM yangjiale <yangjiale133@163.com> wrote:
> > > When a descriptor list spans across cache lines,
> > > updating the flag first can lead to a scenario where the device side
> > > perceives the flag as valid, yet the corresponding address and length
> > > fields remain unupdated—resulting in invalid values.
> > > Therefore, the flag field must be updated last.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: yangjiale <yangjiale133@163.com>
> > > ---
> > >   drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c | 8 ++++----
> > >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > > index fbca7ce1c6bf..036b4f90d30f 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_ring.c
> > > @@ -1688,6 +1688,10 @@ static inline int virtqueue_add_packed(struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > >                                               &addr, &len, premapped, attr))
> > >                                  goto unmap_release;
> > > 
> > > +                       desc[i].addr = cpu_to_le64(addr);
> > > +                       desc[i].len = cpu_to_le32(len);
> > > +                       desc[i].id = cpu_to_le16(id);
> > > +
> > >                          flags = cpu_to_le16(vq->packed.avail_used_flags |
> > >                                      (++c == total_sg ? 0 : VRING_DESC_F_NEXT) |
> > >                                      (n < out_sgs ? 0 : VRING_DESC_F_WRITE));
> > > @@ -1696,10 +1700,6 @@ static inline int virtqueue_add_packed(struct vring_virtqueue *vq,
> > >                          else
> > >                                  desc[i].flags = flags;
> > > 
> > > -                       desc[i].addr = cpu_to_le64(addr);
> > > -                       desc[i].len = cpu_to_le32(len);
> > > -                       desc[i].id = cpu_to_le16(id);
> > > -
> > >                          if (unlikely(vq->use_map_api)) {
> > >                                  vq->packed.desc_extra[curr].addr = premapped ?
> > >                                          DMA_MAPPING_ERROR : addr;
> > These flags are updated before the flags of the head descriptor at the
> > end of the function, at "vq->packed.vring.desc[head].flags =
> > head_flags", so the device should not see these. Because of that, the
> > relative order between the rest of the fields of the same descriptor
> > or other descriptors' fields, except for the head descriptor's flags,
> > should not matter. There is a write memory barrier just before
> > updating the head's flags.
> The above analysis is absolutely correct. Though one hardware vendor told me
> that this driver implementation kinda stops them from reading ahead of
> descriptors already posted beyond the available index., ending up with
> suboptimal performance that is hard to make up by other means. Would it be a
> bad idea to go with this change and add write barrier in a gentle way for a
> small flit in the batch, e.g. commit to memory after every cache line size
> worth of descriptors are posted? Would the memory barrier have negative
> performance overhead to other backend implementation variants than real
> hardware PCI device?
> 
> -Siwei

this would need a new feature bit, won't it?

> > 
> > Also, I don't get why the cache line matters here. Can you expand? Am
> > I missing something?
> 

me too.


  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-05 17:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-02  4:31 [PATCH] VIRTIO: Update the desc 'flag' fied last in packed ring yangjiale
2026-06-02  6:04 ` Eugenio Perez Martin
2026-06-02  6:59   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2026-06-02  9:21     ` Dongli Zhang
2026-06-03  1:58   ` yangjiale133
2026-06-03  2:08     ` Xuan Zhuo
     [not found]   ` <5a3e06d5.103d.19e8b1863dd.Coremail.yangjiale133@163.com>
2026-06-03  5:10     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2026-06-05 16:03   ` Si-Wei Liu
2026-06-05 17:43     ` Michael S. Tsirkin [this message]
2026-06-05 18:50       ` Si-Wei Liu
2026-06-02  6:59 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2026-06-03  1:09 ` Xuan Zhuo

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=20260605134252-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org \
    --to=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=Andrew.Boyer@amd.com \
    --cc=eperezma@redhat.com \
    --cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=si-wei.liu@oracle.com \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux.dev \
    --cc=xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=yangjiale133@163.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